Moonbattery Democrat Party and Communist Party USA Continue to Merge

Jan 30 2015

Democrat Party and Communist Party USA Continue to Merge

Under the leadership of McConnell and Boehner, you could get the impression that the Republican Party is merging with the Democrat Party. If so, the GOP is following close on the heels of the Communist Party USA:

The chairman of the National Committee of the Communist Party USA has penned a 2,023-word manifesto making the critical point that American Communists are eager to work with the Democratic Party to advance the modern communist agenda and achieve communist goals.

Communist Party chairman John Bachtell published his essay last week at People’s World, a “daily news website of, for and by the 99% and the direct descendant of the Daily Worker.”

“[L]abor and other key social forces are not about to leave the Democratic Party anytime soon,” Bachtell promised. “They still see Democrats as the most realistic electoral vehicle” to fight against perceived class enemies.

The days of anticommunist Democrats like JFK and Scoop Jackson are a fading memory now. Communists have infiltrated and now totally dominate the Democrat Party. If only patriots would do the same to the GOP, before commies beat them to it and take over that party too.

On tips from Artfldgr, Rob E, and Ben S. Hat tip: Before It’s News.

By Dave Blount |

68 Responses to “Democrat Party and Communist Party USA Continue to Merge”

Cameraman says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:08 am

I’ve always said the Democrats were Commie’s ….There ya Go!!!
Cameraman says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:08 am

I’ve always said the Democrats were Commie’s ….There ya Go!!!
TED says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:10 am

Hmmm, didn’t realize there was actually a difference…
TED says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:10 am

Hmmm, didn’t realize there was actually a difference…
BlackJack007 says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:14 am

So this is a “coming out,” so to speak.
MAS says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:19 am

Maybe a difference without a distinction?
MAS says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:19 am

Maybe a difference without a distinction?
hiram says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:37 am

This is news?
hiram says:

January 30, 2015 at 11:37 am

This is news?
TED says:

January 30, 2015 at 12:00 pm

DemoCommies have brought dignity to the office…

http://i62.tinypic.com/2i0gf4h.jpg
TED says:

January 30, 2015 at 12:00 pm

DemoCommies have brought dignity to the office…

http://i62.tinypic.com/2i0gf4h.jpg
TED says:

January 30, 2015 at 12:04 pm

http://i59.tinypic.com/2cqodvn.jpg
TED says:

January 30, 2015 at 12:04 pm

http://i59.tinypic.com/2cqodvn.jpg
Son of the Rabbit People says:

January 30, 2015 at 1:02 pm

It’s been true for quite some time, I guess the veneer is off and it’s official now.
Son of the Rabbit People says:

January 30, 2015 at 1:02 pm

It’s been true for quite some time, I guess the veneer is off and it’s official now.
7dkag says:

January 30, 2015 at 4:33 pm

Why did we only kill them in Korea and Vietnam… they come here and everything’s all OK???
7dkag says:

January 30, 2015 at 4:33 pm

Why did we only kill them in Korea and Vietnam… they come here and everything’s all OK???
REDJI says:

January 30, 2015 at 7:30 pm

Gosh, Go figure….Dems are Commies…..LOL….Read your history books folks….Tailgunner Joe McCarthy was telling us this SIXTY YEARS ago…..Did anyone listen? Hell no, now look, they’re right out on main street…….Talk about falling asleep at the switch……and the same exact thing is going on with the Islamic’s…..Only, I fear it will not take them so much time to make an impact on us….
REDJI says:

January 30, 2015 at 7:30 pm

Gosh, Go figure….Dems are Commies…..LOL….Read your history books folks….Tailgunner Joe McCarthy was telling us this SIXTY YEARS ago…..Did anyone listen? Hell no, now look, they’re right out on main street…….Talk about falling asleep at the switch……and the same exact thing is going on with the Islamic’s…..Only, I fear it will not take them so much time to make an impact on us….
Yankeegator says:

January 31, 2015 at 2:33 am

Republicrats are already in league with them… The big trick is getting people to think they are adversaries, but when the cameras are off, and the oligarchs are alone with each other, it’s laughs and slaps on the backs, and they will push the ball forward toward more and more federal control of everything… Subsidarity is a thing long forgotten…
Yankeegator says:

January 31, 2015 at 2:33 am

Republicrats are already in league with them… The big trick is getting people to think they are adversaries, but when the cameras are off, and the oligarchs are alone with each other, it’s laughs and slaps on the backs, and they will push the ball forward toward more and more federal control of everything… Subsidarity is a thing long forgotten…
grayjohn says:

January 31, 2015 at 7:30 am

It happened awhile ago. And it isn’t a merge it’s a Fusion.
grayjohn says:

January 31, 2015 at 7:30 am

It happened awhile ago. And it isn’t a merge it’s a Fusion.
Son_of_Taz says:

January 31, 2015 at 11:57 am

Horowitz is so right and he knows it better than most.
Eddie_Valiant says:

January 31, 2015 at 11:57 am

Horowitz is so right and he knows it better than most.
Socialism is not the Answer | Democrat Party and Communist Party USA Continue to Merge says:

January 31, 2015 at 1:12 pm

[…] Moonbattery […]
Anonymous says:

January 31, 2015 at 7:27 pm

Oh, whine all you want, you old farts. You’re just stalling progress. It’s okay. You’ll all be dead soon of old age anyway.
Anonymous says:

January 31, 2015 at 7:27 pm

Oh, whine all you want, you old farts. You’re just stalling progress. It’s okay. You’ll all be dead soon of old age anyway.
KHarn says:

February 1, 2015 at 5:40 am

“Progress”? The MUSLIMS will kill you bastards off and take over; you idiots paved the way for them. So instead of a murderous 19th century totalitarian system, you’ll live under a murderous 7th century religious system.

ENJOY!
KHarn says:

February 1, 2015 at 5:40 am

“Progress”? The MUSLIMS will kill you bastards off and take over; you idiots paved the way for them. So instead of a murderous 19th century totalitarian system, you’ll live under a murderous 7th century religious system.

ENJOY!
robbie jay says:

March 15, 2015 at 5:26 pm

Frank Marshall Davis and his girlfriend were both commies. Does that make everything clearer?
robbie jay says:

March 15, 2015 at 5:26 pm

Frank Marshall Davis and his girlfriend were both commies. Does that make everything clearer?
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:17 am

Manifesto of the Communist Party
Chapter II. Proletarians and Communists
Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.
These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Manifesto of the Communist Party
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
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.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:17 am

Manifesto of the Communist Party
Chapter II. Proletarians and Communists
Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.
These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Manifesto of the Communist Party
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
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.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:27 am

Full Definition of NAZI
1: a member of a German fascist party controlling Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler
2 often not capitalized
a : one who espouses the beliefs and policies of the German Nazis : fascist
b : one who is likened to a German Nazi : a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person
Examples of NAZI
a gang of racist Nazis
Origin of NAZI
German, by shortening & alteration from Nationalsozialist, from national national + Sozialist socialist
First Known Use: 1930
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:27 am

Full Definition of NAZI
1: a member of a German fascist party controlling Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler
2 often not capitalized
a : one who espouses the beliefs and policies of the German Nazis : fascist
b : one who is likened to a German Nazi : a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person
Examples of NAZI
a gang of racist Nazis
Origin of NAZI
German, by shortening & alteration from Nationalsozialist, from national national + Sozialist socialist
First Known Use: 1930
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:28 am

Scandinavia is a Collectivist Paradise? Not So Much.
A touch too much in the way of conformity, high taxes, and “benign totalitarianism”
In the imagination of the American Left, Scandinavia, that cluster of northern European countries defined by sky-high taxes, expansive welfare policies, and seemingly limitless enthusiasm for snow-related activities, presents the ideal alternative to the rough-and-tumble of American capitalism. They’re peaceful. They’re prosperous. And they routinely dominate the top spots in global “happiness rankings.”

Enter The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia, a cover-to-cover delight from English journalist Michael Booth puncturing the caricature of the region as a semi-socialist paradise. The book, which has just been published in the U.S., is especially powerful in its dissection of the culturally corrosive effects of Scandinavia’s expansive state power, which seems to “smother its people’s motivation, ambition, and spirit.”

A full fifth of Danish adults don’t work and live exclusively on public benefits. Norwegian media is so deeply dull that one of its most popular television shows ever is—this is for real—a seven-hour real-time feed from a camera mounted on a train traversing mountains. Booth calls the prevailing Swedish political norms “benign totalitarianism.”
http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/30/scandinavia-is-a-collectivist-paradise-n
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:28 am

Scandinavia is a Collectivist Paradise? Not So Much.
A touch too much in the way of conformity, high taxes, and “benign totalitarianism”
In the imagination of the American Left, Scandinavia, that cluster of northern European countries defined by sky-high taxes, expansive welfare policies, and seemingly limitless enthusiasm for snow-related activities, presents the ideal alternative to the rough-and-tumble of American capitalism. They’re peaceful. They’re prosperous. And they routinely dominate the top spots in global “happiness rankings.”

Enter The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia, a cover-to-cover delight from English journalist Michael Booth puncturing the caricature of the region as a semi-socialist paradise. The book, which has just been published in the U.S., is especially powerful in its dissection of the culturally corrosive effects of Scandinavia’s expansive state power, which seems to “smother its people’s motivation, ambition, and spirit.”

A full fifth of Danish adults don’t work and live exclusively on public benefits. Norwegian media is so deeply dull that one of its most popular television shows ever is—this is for real—a seven-hour real-time feed from a camera mounted on a train traversing mountains. Booth calls the prevailing Swedish political norms “benign totalitarianism.”
http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/30/scandinavia-is-a-collectivist-paradise-n
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:29 am

Left
2Relating to a person or group favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views: ‘left periodicals such as Marxism Today’

2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views: ‘the Left is preparing to fight presidential elections he is on the left of the party’
Origin
Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/left via @OxfordWords
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:29 am

=============================================
● Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
● A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
● Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
● Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
● Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
● Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
● 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.
● Minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.
● Restoration of the capital gains tax and luxury tax on a progressive, graduated scale.
=============================================
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:29 am

Left
2Relating to a person or group favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views: ‘left periodicals such as Marxism Today’

2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views: ‘the Left is preparing to fight presidential elections he is on the left of the party’
Origin
Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/left via @OxfordWords
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:29 am

=============================================
● Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
● A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
● Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
● Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
● Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
● Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
● 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.
● Minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.
● Restoration of the capital gains tax and luxury tax on a progressive, graduated scale.
=============================================
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:32 am

This is the problem for you folks on the national socialist left – you can’t run from your base ideology so you have to deceive people about it.

This is the problem for you folks on the national socialist left – you can’t run from your base ideology so you have to some counter balance it with supposed evil from the Pro-liberty side.

And the best you can do is repeat the same spurious claim in an attempt to somehow substantiate this false narrative.

As did Goebbels and Lenin

The problem is that the truth will always win out.

Down though history socialists of every stripe have had to resort to oppressive techniques to try and win the day.

But that can only go so far – and only if you can succeed in suppressing the free-speech of the other side – as is evidenced by the actions of infamous socialists down though the ages like Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Chavez and Obama.
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:32 am

This is the problem for you folks on the national socialist left – you can’t run from your base ideology so you have to deceive people about it.

This is the problem for you folks on the national socialist left – you can’t run from your base ideology so you have to some counter balance it with supposed evil from the Pro-liberty side.

And the best you can do is repeat the same spurious claim in an attempt to somehow substantiate this false narrative.

As did Goebbels and Lenin

The problem is that the truth will always win out.

Down though history socialists of every stripe have had to resort to oppressive techniques to try and win the day.

But that can only go so far – and only if you can succeed in suppressing the free-speech of the other side – as is evidenced by the actions of infamous socialists down though the ages like Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Chavez and Obama.

BTW, given that Arbitrary standards are one of the common methods by which national left can deny the obvious about Obama – that he’s a socialist – is to use the rise in the stock market.
(Never mind that such a standard doesn’t exist in the definition)

Soo.. would a Drop in the stock market mean that he’s suddenly a Socialist?
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:33 am

authoritarian
Definition of authoritarian
1 Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom: ‘the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime’
1.1Showing a lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others; dictatorial: ‘he had an authoritarian and at times belligerent manner’
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/authoritarian
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:33 am

authoritarian
Definition of authoritarian
1 Favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom: ‘the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic regime’
1.1Showing a lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others; dictatorial: ‘he had an authoritarian and at times belligerent manner’
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/authoritarian
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:34 am

In certain basic respects – a totalitarian state structure, a single
party, a leader, a secret police, a hatred of political, cultural and
intellectual freedom – fascism and communism are clearly more like each
other than they are like anything in between.

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., Associate Professor of History at Harvard.

Our Comrades on the national socialist Left love to confuse the issue, they like to pretend that their ‘opposition’ is fascism. But the facts is it’s just another form of Collectivism.

A). For simplicity’s sake consider the political spectrum as a number scale from 10 – 0
Zero (0) being NO government (anarchy), Ten(10) being total Government control (totalitarian)

anarchy
Definition of anarchy
1A state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems: ‘he must ensure public order in a country threatened with anarchy’
2Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
Origin Mid 16th century: via medieval Latin from Greek anarkhia, from anarkhos, from an- ‘without’ + arkhos ‘chief, ruler’.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/anarchy

Definition of totalitarian
Syllabification: (to·tal·i·tar·i·an)
Pronunciation: /tōˌtaliˈte(ə)rēən/
adjective
of or relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state: a totalitarian regime
noun
a person advocating a totalitarian system of government.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/totalitarian?

B). On this scale, the higher the number the bigger the Government.

It starts out with No government then minimal government to limited government at the lower ranges to Statist/Communist/Socialist/Fascist/Leninist/Stalinist/Marxist/Leftist/ etc. Authoritarian regimes.

NOW, it should be pretty clear that anarchy and Libertarianism are right next to each other and at the opposite end of the scale from Authoritarian regimes.
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:34 am

In certain basic respects – a totalitarian state structure, a single
party, a leader, a secret police, a hatred of political, cultural and
intellectual freedom – fascism and communism are clearly more like each
other than they are like anything in between.

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., Associate Professor of History at Harvard.

Our Comrades on the national socialist Left love to confuse the issue, they like to pretend that their ‘opposition’ is fascism. But the facts is it’s just another form of Collectivism.

A). For simplicity’s sake consider the political spectrum as a number scale from 10 – 0
Zero (0) being NO government (anarchy), Ten(10) being total Government control (totalitarian)

anarchy
Definition of anarchy
1A state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems: ‘he must ensure public order in a country threatened with anarchy’
2Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
Origin Mid 16th century: via medieval Latin from Greek anarkhia, from anarkhos, from an- ‘without’ + arkhos ‘chief, ruler’.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/anarchy

Definition of totalitarian
Syllabification: (to·tal·i·tar·i·an)
Pronunciation: /tōˌtaliˈte(ə)rēən/
adjective
of or relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state: a totalitarian regime
noun
a person advocating a totalitarian system of government.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/totalitarian?

B). On this scale, the higher the number the bigger the Government.

It starts out with No government then minimal government to limited government at the lower ranges to Statist/Communist/Socialist/Fascist/Leninist/Stalinist/Marxist/Leftist/ etc. Authoritarian regimes.

NOW, it should be pretty clear that anarchy and Libertarianism are right next to each other and at the opposite end of the scale from Authoritarian regimes.
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:43 am

“Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy.” John Derbyshire
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:43 am

“Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy.” John Derbyshire
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:44 am

Nazi
German Nationalsozialistische [deutsche Arbeiter-Partei] (National Socialist [German Workers’ Party])
The American Heritage® Abbreviations Dictionary, Third Edition
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:44 am

Nazi
German Nationalsozialistische [deutsche Arbeiter-Partei] (National Socialist [German Workers’ Party])
The American Heritage® Abbreviations Dictionary, Third Edition
DinaRehn says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:51 am

Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty – Ronald Reagan
$59154503 says:

May 23, 2015 at 8:51 am

Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty – Ronald Reagan
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 10:58 am

Friday, May 22, 2015
Fascism: Yours, Mine, and Ours
Fascism is an economic system that marries the state to business, where business holds the title but state holds control.

Transcript:
Some of you, though I trust not all of you, are familiar with what we call “Godwin’s law.” This is a particular law which is born out of empirical study of the Internet and it holds that, given enough time, any and all internet arguments will eventually involve some side of the argument accusing the other side of the argument of either being like Hitler or of being a Nazi. The corollary to that is that the first one to make that observation loses the argument.

Well, I don’t know how many times we’ve done “-isms,” but we have finally come to “fascism” in our -ism study today. The truth of the matter is of course, there aren’t a whole lot of people out there, though there are some, who actively, happily, publicly, and unapologetically argue in defense of fascism. The problem is, however, that because we don’t know what fascism is, and because we associate it with a bunch of accidental trappings to it, we miss it when it comes us.

Fascism, first and foremost, is an economic theory. It has precious little to do with the horrors of the Holocaust, it has precious little to do with world conquest, and it certainly has nothing whatever to do with goose stepping and “heil hitler” signs and all the other kinds of stock bad-guy things that we get from Nazi Germany. Fascism is an economic system that is distinguished from socialism or communism in a very narrow way. Don’t forget that, while we like to present fascism as the hard right on the political spectrum and communism as the hard left on the political spectrum, fascism is a socialistic concept. The name “Nazi” stands for the “National Socialist Party.” What distinguishes the fascists and the communists is not socialism or not-socialism but rather national socialism versus international socialism.

There is also this critical distinction: communism exists as a theory that suggests that the only way to have economic justice is not merely to divvy up the fruit of production equally among all members of society, but that it is about ownership of the means of production. This has to be universal or ultimately in the hands of the state. The state owns the means of production. Fascism disagrees with that. Fascism is a system that affirms that private individuals certainly may own property, they certainly may own the means of production, the tools and the factory, the ways in which things get made. What defines fascism however is that while individuals may own property or the means of production, control of that property and the means of production remains in the hand of the state.

Now if we know much at all about what ownership is, what property is, we would recognize that essential to the concept of “property” is control. If you control my car, you drive it, you fill it with gas when you want to fill it with gas, you change the oil when you want to change oil, but you let me hold onto the title in my file cabinet at home then I don’t really own that car, you own that car. Ownership requires control. Fascism then is that system that maintains the facade of private property, but what you end up having is this bizarre marriage of business and state. Where the business is protected by the state, the business is shielded from competition, guaranteed of profits but ultimately controlled by the state.

Does this, I wonder, sound awfully familiar to anyone? Fascism allows us to own property, but it tells us what we have to pay those who work inside our factory. It tells us what percentage of this material we must include in the thing that we make. It tells us how many hours people are allowed to work. It tells is this and it tells us that until finally you are left with the obvious conclusion that the state owns what we think we own because it controls all that we have.

Friends, we don’t have a socialist economy here in United States, despite all the squawking and screaming about President Obama. Nor do we have a free market, despite what we would like to believe or what we once might have enjoyed. What we are living in, economically speaking, is fascism where property is held privately in name only, but controlled by an army of bureaucrats from the central government. This is one reason why we are called to love and to seek liberty because fascism is a betrayal and assault upon the right of property–a right which was given to us by God Himself. That is what our founding documents say and, more importantly still, that is what the ten commandments say. Fascism isn’t just bad economics, it is theft.
Dr. R.C. Sproul, Jr. teaches at Reformation Bible College in Sanford, Florida where he also serves as a teaching fellow for Ligonier Ministries. He is also the former editor of Tabletalk magazine.
http://rcsprouljr.com/jce/fascism/
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 10:58 am

Definition of Left
2 Relating to a person or group favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views: ‘left periodicals such as Marxism Today’
2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views
Origin: Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/left

Definition of national
Pronunciation: /ˈnaSHənəl/
adjective
of or relating to a nation; common to or characteristic of a whole nation:this policy may have been in the national interest a national newspaper
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/national?q=national

Definition of socialism
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 10:58 am

Friday, May 22, 2015
Fascism: Yours, Mine, and Ours
Fascism is an economic system that marries the state to business, where business holds the title but state holds control.

Transcript:
Some of you, though I trust not all of you, are familiar with what we call “Godwin’s law.” This is a particular law which is born out of empirical study of the Internet and it holds that, given enough time, any and all internet arguments will eventually involve some side of the argument accusing the other side of the argument of either being like Hitler or of being a Nazi. The corollary to that is that the first one to make that observation loses the argument.

Well, I don’t know how many times we’ve done “-isms,” but we have finally come to “fascism” in our -ism study today. The truth of the matter is of course, there aren’t a whole lot of people out there, though there are some, who actively, happily, publicly, and unapologetically argue in defense of fascism. The problem is, however, that because we don’t know what fascism is, and because we associate it with a bunch of accidental trappings to it, we miss it when it comes us.

Fascism, first and foremost, is an economic theory. It has precious little to do with the horrors of the Holocaust, it has precious little to do with world conquest, and it certainly has nothing whatever to do with goose stepping and “heil hitler” signs and all the other kinds of stock bad-guy things that we get from Nazi Germany. Fascism is an economic system that is distinguished from socialism or communism in a very narrow way. Don’t forget that, while we like to present fascism as the hard right on the political spectrum and communism as the hard left on the political spectrum, fascism is a socialistic concept. The name “Nazi” stands for the “National Socialist Party.” What distinguishes the fascists and the communists is not socialism or not-socialism but rather national socialism versus international socialism.

There is also this critical distinction: communism exists as a theory that suggests that the only way to have economic justice is not merely to divvy up the fruit of production equally among all members of society, but that it is about ownership of the means of production. This has to be universal or ultimately in the hands of the state. The state owns the means of production. Fascism disagrees with that. Fascism is a system that affirms that private individuals certainly may own property, they certainly may own the means of production, the tools and the factory, the ways in which things get made. What defines fascism however is that while individuals may own property or the means of production, control of that property and the means of production remains in the hand of the state.

Now if we know much at all about what ownership is, what property is, we would recognize that essential to the concept of “property” is control. If you control my car, you drive it, you fill it with gas when you want to fill it with gas, you change the oil when you want to change oil, but you let me hold onto the title in my file cabinet at home then I don’t really own that car, you own that car. Ownership requires control. Fascism then is that system that maintains the facade of private property, but what you end up having is this bizarre marriage of business and state. Where the business is protected by the state, the business is shielded from competition, guaranteed of profits but ultimately controlled by the state.

Does this, I wonder, sound awfully familiar to anyone? Fascism allows us to own property, but it tells us what we have to pay those who work inside our factory. It tells us what percentage of this material we must include in the thing that we make. It tells us how many hours people are allowed to work. It tells is this and it tells us that until finally you are left with the obvious conclusion that the state owns what we think we own because it controls all that we have.

Friends, we don’t have a socialist economy here in United States, despite all the squawking and screaming about President Obama. Nor do we have a free market, despite what we would like to believe or what we once might have enjoyed. What we are living in, economically speaking, is fascism where property is held privately in name only, but controlled by an army of bureaucrats from the central government. This is one reason why we are called to love and to seek liberty because fascism is a betrayal and assault upon the right of property–a right which was given to us by God Himself. That is what our founding documents say and, more importantly still, that is what the ten commandments say. Fascism isn’t just bad economics, it is theft.
Dr. R.C. Sproul, Jr. teaches at Reformation Bible College in Sanford, Florida where he also serves as a teaching fellow for Ligonier Ministries. He is also the former editor of Tabletalk magazine.
http://rcsprouljr.com/jce/fascism/
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 10:58 am

Definition of Left
2 Relating to a person or group favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views: ‘left periodicals such as Marxism Today’
2 (often the Left) [treated as singular or plural] A group or party favouring radical, reforming, or socialist views
Origin: Old English lyft, left ‘weak’ (the left-hand side being regarded as the weaker side of the body), of West Germanic origin.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/left

Definition of national
Pronunciation: /ˈnaSHənəl/
adjective
of or relating to a nation; common to or characteristic of a whole nation:this policy may have been in the national interest a national newspaper
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/national?q=national

Definition of socialism
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:00 am

Socialism Is Misery, and I Should Know
Venezuela Is Reliving a Failed Model
I’ve had the dubious fortune to experience life in two countries that claimed to be marching towards socialism. I was in Chile between 1971 and 1972 when President Salvador Allende led a government attempting to create a socialist state of freedom. I lived in Venezuela from 1974 until President Hugo Chávez set course towards the “sea of happiness” that was nothing other than the Cuban socialist model.

In both cases I had to put up with lines outside stores provoked by shortages, government-backed violence, and a harsh daily existence in which every instant was dedicated to hunting down basic products and food.

Venezuelan socialism was, for a while, able to hide the miseries that came in its wake. The elevated price of oil on global markets gave the government foreign currency reserves to plow money into social spending programs that consisted of little more than cash handouts. The government wrote blank checks to finance the spread of its ideology abroad, and to swell a burgeoning bureaucracy dependent on state largesse for its existence.
http://panampost.com/carlos-sabino/2015/02/16/socialism-is-misery-and-i-should-know/
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:00 am

Socialism Is Misery, and I Should Know
Venezuela Is Reliving a Failed Model
I’ve had the dubious fortune to experience life in two countries that claimed to be marching towards socialism. I was in Chile between 1971 and 1972 when President Salvador Allende led a government attempting to create a socialist state of freedom. I lived in Venezuela from 1974 until President Hugo Chávez set course towards the “sea of happiness” that was nothing other than the Cuban socialist model.

In both cases I had to put up with lines outside stores provoked by shortages, government-backed violence, and a harsh daily existence in which every instant was dedicated to hunting down basic products and food.

Venezuelan socialism was, for a while, able to hide the miseries that came in its wake. The elevated price of oil on global markets gave the government foreign currency reserves to plow money into social spending programs that consisted of little more than cash handouts. The government wrote blank checks to finance the spread of its ideology abroad, and to swell a burgeoning bureaucracy dependent on state largesse for its existence.
http://panampost.com/carlos-sabino/2015/02/16/socialism-is-misery-and-i-should-know/
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:01 am

Scandinavia is a Collectivist Paradise? Not So Much.
A touch too much in the way of conformity, high taxes, and “benign totalitarianism”
In the imagination of the American Left, Scandinavia, that cluster of northern European countries defined by sky-high taxes, expansive welfare policies, and seemingly limitless enthusiasm for snow-related activities, presents the ideal alternative to the rough-and-tumble of American capitalism. They’re peaceful. They’re prosperous. And they routinely dominate the top spots in global “happiness rankings.”

Enter The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia, a cover-to-cover delight from English journalist Michael Booth puncturing the caricature of the region as a semi-socialist paradise. The book, which has just been published in the U.S., is especially powerful in its dissection of the culturally corrosive effects of Scandinavia’s expansive state power, which seems to “smother its people’s motivation, ambition, and spirit.”

A full fifth of Danish adults don’t work and live exclusively on public benefits. Norwegian media is so deeply dull that one of its most popular television shows ever is—this is for real—a seven-hour real-time feed from a camera mounted on a train traversing mountains. Booth calls the prevailing Swedish political norms “benign totalitarianism.”
http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/30/scandinavia-is-a-collectivist-paradise-n
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:01 am

Scandinavia is a Collectivist Paradise? Not So Much.
A touch too much in the way of conformity, high taxes, and “benign totalitarianism”
In the imagination of the American Left, Scandinavia, that cluster of northern European countries defined by sky-high taxes, expansive welfare policies, and seemingly limitless enthusiasm for snow-related activities, presents the ideal alternative to the rough-and-tumble of American capitalism. They’re peaceful. They’re prosperous. And they routinely dominate the top spots in global “happiness rankings.”

Enter The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia, a cover-to-cover delight from English journalist Michael Booth puncturing the caricature of the region as a semi-socialist paradise. The book, which has just been published in the U.S., is especially powerful in its dissection of the culturally corrosive effects of Scandinavia’s expansive state power, which seems to “smother its people’s motivation, ambition, and spirit.”

A full fifth of Danish adults don’t work and live exclusively on public benefits. Norwegian media is so deeply dull that one of its most popular television shows ever is—this is for real—a seven-hour real-time feed from a camera mounted on a train traversing mountains. Booth calls the prevailing Swedish political norms “benign totalitarianism.”
http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/30/scandinavia-is-a-collectivist-paradise-n
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:03 am

Legacy of Communism
Communism’s Crimes Against Humanity

In October 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution gave birth to the deadliest ideology in history – Communism. In less than 100 years, Communism has claimed more than 100 million victims. Today, it continues to rule one-fifth of the world’s people.

Thanks to the efforts of The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and its supporters the United States now has a memorial to commemorate these victims. This is fitting since the U.S. has been communism’s greatest challenger. Dedicated on June 12, 2007 by President George W. Bush, The Victims of Communism Memorial stands on on Massachusetts Avenue near the U.S. Capitol building. It is an enduring reminder of the horrific legacy of totalitarianism.
Never Forget

A free people cannot afford to forget the evils and the costs of Communism. We must no allow the atrocities of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, and Castro to fade into the background of history. We must not forget the trail of blood and tears this utopian deception has left behind. How:

The Bolsheviks murdered their way ino power…
Lenin destroyed hundreds of thousands of Cossacks…
The Kremlin starved to death more than six million in Ukraine…
Mao murdered tens of millions of Chinese peasants during his “Great Leap Forward”…
Ho Chi Minh sent 850,000 Vietnamese to their graves in “education camps”…
Castro buried dissenters in the infamous Isle of Pines…
The student voices of freedom were silenced at Tiananmen Square in Beijing…
http://victimsofcommunism.org/mission/legacy-of-communism/
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:03 am

Legacy of Communism
Communism’s Crimes Against Humanity

In October 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution gave birth to the deadliest ideology in history – Communism. In less than 100 years, Communism has claimed more than 100 million victims. Today, it continues to rule one-fifth of the world’s people.

Thanks to the efforts of The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and its supporters the United States now has a memorial to commemorate these victims. This is fitting since the U.S. has been communism’s greatest challenger. Dedicated on June 12, 2007 by President George W. Bush, The Victims of Communism Memorial stands on on Massachusetts Avenue near the U.S. Capitol building. It is an enduring reminder of the horrific legacy of totalitarianism.
Never Forget

A free people cannot afford to forget the evils and the costs of Communism. We must no allow the atrocities of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, and Castro to fade into the background of history. We must not forget the trail of blood and tears this utopian deception has left behind. How:

The Bolsheviks murdered their way ino power…
Lenin destroyed hundreds of thousands of Cossacks…
The Kremlin starved to death more than six million in Ukraine…
Mao murdered tens of millions of Chinese peasants during his “Great Leap Forward”…
Ho Chi Minh sent 850,000 Vietnamese to their graves in “education camps”…
Castro buried dissenters in the infamous Isle of Pines…
The student voices of freedom were silenced at Tiananmen Square in Beijing…
http://victimsofcommunism.org/mission/legacy-of-communism/
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:23 am

What Is Communism? http://blog.victimsofcommunism.org/what-is-communism/

What Is Communism?
The term “communism” originated in France in the 1840’s but it acquired a modern meaning only in 1918 when Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, having seized power in what used to be the Russian empire, named his party Communist.

Communism is a variant of socialism. But differs from it in this important respect: while socialists believe in democracy and assume that they will come to power democratically and rule democratically, Lenin and his Communist followers did not.

On one occasion, Lenin frankly defined his government as “power that is limited by nothing, by no laws, that is restrained by absolutely no rules, that rests directly on coercion” — an excellent definition of what later came to be labeled a “totalitarian regime.”

The Communists, like the socialists and anarchists, assert that their dictatorship is only a temporary regime, established to destroy the propertied classes and the entire socio-political order founded by them. Once the bourgeoisie has been crushed, the state will “wither away” and yield to a free association of communities.

But this objective has in fact not been achieved by any Communist regime. For one, even after the old propertied classes have been dispossessed, new ones emerge or are ready to emerge to take their place. Secondly, in order to maintain the “proletarian dictatorship” it is necessary to create a privileged caste, called in Russia nomenklatura, that arrogates itself the rights and privileges of the old bourgeoisie.

As a result, the Communist state everywhere atrophies: it stays in place, unable to change yet unwilling to yield. Examples of such atrophied Communist regimes today are Cuba and North Korea. The Soviet Union, the oldest and largest of these regimes, collapsed only because the ruling elite started making changes that brought the whole edifice down.

Experience indicates that a Communist regime can dissolve only if its rulers are no longer willing to maintain it. It cannot be dissolved from below.
http://blog.victimsofcommunism.org/what-is-communism/
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:23 am

What Is Communism? http://blog.victimsofcommunism.org/what-is-communism/

What Is Communism?
The term “communism” originated in France in the 1840’s but it acquired a modern meaning only in 1918 when Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, having seized power in what used to be the Russian empire, named his party Communist.

Communism is a variant of socialism. But differs from it in this important respect: while socialists believe in democracy and assume that they will come to power democratically and rule democratically, Lenin and his Communist followers did not.

On one occasion, Lenin frankly defined his government as “power that is limited by nothing, by no laws, that is restrained by absolutely no rules, that rests directly on coercion” — an excellent definition of what later came to be labeled a “totalitarian regime.”

The Communists, like the socialists and anarchists, assert that their dictatorship is only a temporary regime, established to destroy the propertied classes and the entire socio-political order founded by them. Once the bourgeoisie has been crushed, the state will “wither away” and yield to a free association of communities.

But this objective has in fact not been achieved by any Communist regime. For one, even after the old propertied classes have been dispossessed, new ones emerge or are ready to emerge to take their place. Secondly, in order to maintain the “proletarian dictatorship” it is necessary to create a privileged caste, called in Russia nomenklatura, that arrogates itself the rights and privileges of the old bourgeoisie.

As a result, the Communist state everywhere atrophies: it stays in place, unable to change yet unwilling to yield. Examples of such atrophied Communist regimes today are Cuba and North Korea. The Soviet Union, the oldest and largest of these regimes, collapsed only because the ruling elite started making changes that brought the whole edifice down.

Experience indicates that a Communist regime can dissolve only if its rulers are no longer willing to maintain it. It cannot be dissolved from below.
http://blog.victimsofcommunism.org/what-is-communism/
DinaRehn says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:58 am

The Bloody History of Communism Full
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3pzMHD0F4yQ

Published on Apr 28, 2012

Communism was the bloodiest ideology that caused more than 120 million innocent deaths in the 20th century. It was a nightmare which promised equality and justice, but which brought only bloodshed, death, torture and fear. This three-volume documentary displays the terrible savagery of communism and its underlying philosophy. From Marx to Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot, discover how the materialist philosophy transforms humans into theorists of violence and masters of cruelty.
http://www.harunyahya.com/
$59154503 says:

May 29, 2015 at 11:58 am

The Bloody History of Communism Full
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3pzMHD0F4yQ

Published on Apr 28, 2012

Communism was the bloodiest ideology that caused more than 120 million innocent deaths in the 20th century. It was a nightmare which promised equality and justice, but which brought only bloodshed, death, torture and fear. This three-volume documentary displays the terrible savagery of communism and its underlying philosophy. From Marx to Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot, discover how the materialist philosophy transforms humans into theorists of violence and masters of cruelty.
http://www.harunyahya.com/