What to expect from Socialism. (First part): In the primitive community there was no individualism and necessity forced the human being to share. The men united to hunt an animal and...

Alber

In the primitive community there was no individualism and necessity forced the human being to share. The men united to hunt an animal and the women to collect fruits and roots, what they acquired was consumed by all, because they could not keep it, since they lacked the means and knowledge to do so. When the human being was able to produce a surplus of goods over what was essential to survive, it was when the antagonism between the individual and the community began. Some individuals, stronger or more intelligent, began to dominate the collectivity seizing the surplus that the individuals produced and began to appear classes (chieftains, warriors, shamans, etc.), which formed the government of the collectivity; and when these communities had a superior development, the states appeared and slave systems were adopted, which in time became feudal, until they reached capitalism.
History is abundant in examples of the abuses of the dominant classes on the individual and on the collectivity, producing revolutions to change the rulers and the forms of government. These revolutions produced changes that established positions, situating the ideas that defend individualism on the right and collectivists on the left, without considering that there may be a position that tries to resolve the antagonism between the collectivity and classist individualism. Such is the idea of the Republic based on a magna carta and laws that promote freedom, justice, peace, solidarity and well-being; as well as the existence of political organizations that defend this idea.
Those ideas that try to impose a collectivist system are the negation of the negation, because trying to suppress the abuse of class individualism, they foment it; since it is necessary to have a form of government, because anarchy and communism are unrealizable utopias, by appealing to the conscience of the human being that is almost always affected by the excess of self-esteem and personal interest.
In the last century we had the misfortune to know what the collectivist systems produce and still in the present century we know about their product, because it is undeniable that Fascism, Nazism, Socialism and badly called Communism are collectivist ideas, which have much in common. All these ideas aim to put the collective over classist individualism; but this is false, since what they have done is to give all the powers to the State, turning the individual into a slave or servant of the glebe. They also established a single party, a maximum leader and a new class, which had an absolute power over the community, leading humanity backwards, with which we can say that these ideas, as we have mentioned before, are the negation of the negation, because trying to promote the good they do the evil. All these ideas are based on the best intentions, but it must always be remembered that the path of hell is paved with good intentions.
Socialism, like Fascism or Communism, are pernicious ideas, which in some places have been imposed by revolutions that deceived the people (Russia, Italy, China and Cuba), in others through elections that made it possible for them to usurp power (Germany and Venezuela) and also by imposition of foreign forces (North Korea). In democratic countries collectivism advances its interests using clientelism; that is, the exchange of goods and services for political support, which once achieved the objective of taking over the absolute power of the State, is eliminated, imposing an iron yoke on the community and the individual. In this group we can place the European socialists, who impose ruinous conditions for the countries of the union, such as the acceptance of a migration from the Muslim countries, which is producing great discontent in the places where the acceptance of these immigrants has been forced, producing the Brexit or separation from Great Britain and the refusal of countries that suffered the imposition of the socialist yoke such as Poland and Hungary.
It is worth asking: What can we expect in the USA?--- Trying to be impartial I think that the Republican party is not interested in socialism; but we see that in the ranks of the Democratic Party that ideology is promoted so as the clientelism that tends to that system. Historically in both parties there were conservative and liberal wings, but at present, politics has become polarized, at least in the Democratic Party, which has a tendency to extreme liberalism (radicalism) or socialism as we have already mentioned; and its militants, who call themselves "progressive" (movement that has as its mother socialism), threaten those who expose ideas that are contrary to them, promoting violent actions against the republicans; as well as civil disobedience, not accepting that they lost the elections legally .--- "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy". Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. ---This is one of the rules for radicals that Alinsky recommends.
We have read about the situation that occurred when Abaham Lincoln was elected to the presidency in 1860, and it seems that to a certain extent history is repeating itself. After the period in which Ronald Reagan governed, the behavior of democrat politicians has had a remarkable change, being very different the position of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (followers of Saul Alinsky) to that of John F. Kennedy.
Will the Democratic Party be for the negation of the negation? (To be continue).

peg w

Bring socialism on! We have had too much of the 1% picking our pockets.

Lonewolf

Alber wrote:

In the primitive community there was no individualism and necessity forced the human being to share. The men united to hunt an animal and the women to collect fruits and roots, what they acquired was consumed by all, because they could not keep it, since they lacked the means and knowledge to do so. When the human being was able to produce a surplus of goods over what was essential to survive, it was when the antagonism between the individual and the community began. Some individuals, stronger or more intelligent, began to dominate the collectivity seizing the surplus that the individuals produced and began to appear classes (chieftains, warriors, shamans, etc.), which formed the government of the collectivity; and when these communities had a superior development, the states appeared and slave systems were adopted, which in time became feudal, until they reached capitalism.
History is abundant in examples of the abuses of the dominant classes on the individual and on the collectivity, producing revolutions to change the rulers and the forms of government. These revolutions produced changes that established positions, situating the ideas that defend individualism on the right and collectivists on the left, without considering that there may be a position that tries to resolve the antagonism between the collectivity and classist individualism. Such is the idea of the Republic based on a magna carta and laws that promote freedom, justice, peace, solidarity and well-being; as well as the existence of political organizations that defend this idea.
Those ideas that try to impose a collectivist system are the negation of the negation, because trying to suppress the abuse of class individualism, they foment it; since it is necessary to have a form of government, because anarchy and communism are unrealizable utopias, by appealing to the conscience of the human being that is almost always affected by the excess of self-esteem and personal interest.
In the last century we had the misfortune to know what the collectivist systems produce and still in the present century we know about their product, because it is undeniable that Fascism, Nazism, Socialism and badly called Communism are collectivist ideas, which have much in common. All these ideas aim to put the collective over classist individualism; but this is false, since what they have done is to give all the powers to the State, turning the individual into a slave or servant of the glebe. They also established a single party, a maximum leader and a new class, which had an absolute power over the community, leading humanity backwards, with which we can say that these ideas, as we have mentioned before, are the negation of the negation, because trying to promote the good they do the evil. All these ideas are based on the best intentions, but it must always be remembered that the path of hell is paved with good intentions.
Socialism, like Fascism or Communism, are pernicious ideas, which in some places have been imposed by revolutions that deceived the people (Russia, Italy, China and Cuba), in others through elections that made it possible for them to usurp power (Germany and Venezuela) and also by imposition of foreign forces (North Korea). In democratic countries collectivism advances its interests using clientelism; that is, the exchange of goods and services for political support, which once achieved the objective of taking over the absolute power of the State, is eliminated, imposing an iron yoke on the community and the individual. In this group we can place the European socialists, who impose ruinous conditions for the countries of the union, such as the acceptance of a migration from the Muslim countries, which is producing great discontent in the places where the acceptance of these immigrants has been forced, producing the Brexit or separation from Great Britain and the refusal of countries that suffered the imposition of the socialist yoke such as Poland and Hungary.
It is worth asking: What can we expect in the USA?--- Trying to be impartial I think that the Republican party is not interested in socialism; but we see that in the ranks of the Democratic Party that ideology is promoted so as the clientelism that tends to that system. Historically in both parties there were conservative and liberal wings, but at present, politics has become polarized, at least in the Democratic Party, which has a tendency to extreme liberalism (radicalism) or socialism as we have already mentioned; and its militants, who call themselves "progressive" (movement that has as its mother socialism), threaten those who expose ideas that are contrary to them, promoting violent actions against the republicans; as well as civil disobedience, not accepting that they lost the elections legally .--- "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy". Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. ---This is one of the rules for radicals that Alinsky recommends.
We have read about the situation that occurred when Abaham Lincoln was elected to the presidency in 1860, and it seems that to a certain extent history is repeating itself. After the period in which Ronald Reagan governed, the behavior of democrat politicians has had a remarkable change, being very different the position of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (followers of Saul Alinsky) to that of John F. Kennedy.
Will the Democratic Party be for the negation of the negation? (To be continue).

In the primitive community there was no individual... (show quote)

Attached file:
(Download)

Comment Loc: California

Alber wrote:

In the primitive community there was no individualism and necessity forced the human being to share. The men united to hunt an animal and the women to collect fruits and roots, what they acquired was consumed by all, because they could not keep it, since they lacked the means and knowledge to do so. When the human being was able to produce a surplus of goods over what was essential to survive, it was when the antagonism between the individual and the community began. Some individuals, stronger or more intelligent, began to dominate the collectivity seizing the surplus that the individuals produced and began to appear classes (chieftains, warriors, shamans, etc.), which formed the government of the collectivity; and when these communities had a superior development, the states appeared and slave systems were adopted, which in time became feudal, until they reached capitalism.
History is abundant in examples of the abuses of the dominant classes on the individual and on the collectivity, producing revolutions to change the rulers and the forms of government. These revolutions produced changes that established positions, situating the ideas that defend individualism on the right and collectivists on the left, without considering that there may be a position that tries to resolve the antagonism between the collectivity and classist individualism. Such is the idea of the Republic based on a magna carta and laws that promote freedom, justice, peace, solidarity and well-being; as well as the existence of political organizations that defend this idea.
Those ideas that try to impose a collectivist system are the negation of the negation, because trying to suppress the abuse of class individualism, they foment it; since it is necessary to have a form of government, because anarchy and communism are unrealizable utopias, by appealing to the conscience of the human being that is almost always affected by the excess of self-esteem and personal interest.
In the last century we had the misfortune to know what the collectivist systems produce and still in the present century we know about their product, because it is undeniable that Fascism, Nazism, Socialism and badly called Communism are collectivist ideas, which have much in common. All these ideas aim to put the collective over classist individualism; but this is false, since what they have done is to give all the powers to the State, turning the individual into a slave or servant of the glebe. They also established a single party, a maximum leader and a new class, which had an absolute power over the community, leading humanity backwards, with which we can say that these ideas, as we have mentioned before, are the negation of the negation, because trying to promote the good they do the evil. All these ideas are based on the best intentions, but it must always be remembered that the path of hell is paved with good intentions.
Socialism, like Fascism or Communism, are pernicious ideas, which in some places have been imposed by revolutions that deceived the people (Russia, Italy, China and Cuba), in others through elections that made it possible for them to usurp power (Germany and Venezuela) and also by imposition of foreign forces (North Korea). In democratic countries collectivism advances its interests using clientelism; that is, the exchange of goods and services for political support, which once achieved the objective of taking over the absolute power of the State, is eliminated, imposing an iron yoke on the community and the individual. In this group we can place the European socialists, who impose ruinous conditions for the countries of the union, such as the acceptance of a migration from the Muslim countries, which is producing great discontent in the places where the acceptance of these immigrants has been forced, producing the Brexit or separation from Great Britain and the refusal of countries that suffered the imposition of the socialist yoke such as Poland and Hungary.
It is worth asking: What can we expect in the USA?--- Trying to be impartial I think that the Republican party is not interested in socialism; but we see that in the ranks of the Democratic Party that ideology is promoted so as the clientelism that tends to that system. Historically in both parties there were conservative and liberal wings, but at present, politics has become polarized, at least in the Democratic Party, which has a tendency to extreme liberalism (radicalism) or socialism as we have already mentioned; and its militants, who call themselves "progressive" (movement that has as its mother socialism), threaten those who expose ideas that are contrary to them, promoting violent actions against the republicans; as well as civil disobedience, not accepting that they lost the elections legally .--- "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy". Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. ---This is one of the rules for radicals that Alinsky recommends.
We have read about the situation that occurred when Abaham Lincoln was elected to the presidency in 1860, and it seems that to a certain extent history is repeating itself. After the period in which Ronald Reagan governed, the behavior of democrat politicians has had a remarkable change, being very different the position of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (followers of Saul Alinsky) to that of John F. Kennedy.
Will the Democratic Party be for the negation of the negation? (To be continue).

In the primitive community there was no individual... (show quote)

Thanks!

WAde Bartlett

Should a person want socialism they want the govt to control all the money.
For me I do not want the govt to get my money and give me 1/2 of it and give the other 50% to some one that has not worked for it. No way.

clevey77

Very well thought out... Even a well thought out argument can be discriminated in the flux of ignorance of the histories of past governance. It has ben said, A person without the study of ancient history, is still a childish adolescent sucking on the tit of current history… Without the vison of the past as a guild to our future, we give our Individualism away to the master of government. “We The People” comes to mind… that concept was lost in the beginning years following it’s conception, overthrown by the kings court, George the II… The Brits lords of collective legalism, (the attorneys of doom and bondage to parliamentary law).

Truly, we see parliamentary law of class in the court of the king… It’s not by the people, in shape or form’ and it is, to the victor goes the spoils mentality… only giving lip service and rhetoric to “We The People”…
Now we see, Mob Rule and Trotskyism, another Talmudic legalist mind f**k, designed to disseminate the masses and unity of human welfare without it’s racist overtones and Jewish money lender controls of all resources as the glebe truly finds the apex of dominate rule by the few… Ironically, most of us can’t see past the nose on our face…

This is a good post… waiting for part 2… maybe this will be a series of familiar R,R, R’s (I’ve Read this, I’ve Repeated this’ I’ve Researched until in stir crazy), nevertheless, History in the making may be the history of past failures… The artificial is the artifact of human governance and class rule… Thusly, Machiavellian in nature… The Narcissisticist call it elementary and the chosen call it gospel… And the ignorant masses fumble at every turn or throw of the dice… Gambling without a clue, the house allways wins!
I regress , more is less, 

Alber wrote:

In the primitive community there was no individualism and necessity forced the human being to share. The men united to hunt an animal and the women to collect fruits and roots, what they acquired was consumed by all, because they could not keep it, since they lacked the means and knowledge to do so. When the human being was able to produce a surplus of goods over what was essential to survive, it was when the antagonism between the individual and the community began. Some individuals, stronger or more intelligent, began to dominate the collectivity seizing the surplus that the individuals produced and began to appear classes (chieftains, warriors, shamans, etc.), which formed the government of the collectivity; and when these communities had a superior development, the states appeared and slave systems were adopted, which in time became feudal, until they reached capitalism.
History is abundant in examples of the abuses of the dominant classes on the individual and on the collectivity, producing revolutions to change the rulers and the forms of government. These revolutions produced changes that established positions, situating the ideas that defend individualism on the right and collectivists on the left, without considering that there may be a position that tries to resolve the antagonism between the collectivity and classist individualism. Such is the idea of the Republic based on a magna carta and laws that promote freedom, justice, peace, solidarity and well-being; as well as the existence of political organizations that defend this idea.
Those ideas that try to impose a collectivist system are the negation of the negation, because trying to suppress the abuse of class individualism, they foment it; since it is necessary to have a form of government, because anarchy and communism are unrealizable utopias, by appealing to the conscience of the human being that is almost always affected by the excess of self-esteem and personal interest.
In the last century we had the misfortune to know what the collectivist systems produce and still in the present century we know about their product, because it is undeniable that Fascism, Nazism, Socialism and badly called Communism are collectivist ideas, which have much in common. All these ideas aim to put the collective over classist individualism; but this is false, since what they have done is to give all the powers to the State, turning the individual into a slave or servant of the glebe. They also established a single party, a maximum leader and a new class, which had an absolute power over the community, leading humanity backwards, with which we can say that these ideas, as we have mentioned before, are the negation of the negation, because trying to promote the good they do the evil. All these ideas are based on the best intentions, but it must always be remembered that the path of hell is paved with good intentions.
Socialism, like Fascism or Communism, are pernicious ideas, which in some places have been imposed by revolutions that deceived the people (Russia, Italy, China and Cuba), in others through elections that made it possible for them to usurp power (Germany and Venezuela) and also by imposition of foreign forces (North Korea). In democratic countries collectivism advances its interests using clientelism; that is, the exchange of goods and services for political support, which once achieved the objective of taking over the absolute power of the State, is eliminated, imposing an iron yoke on the community and the individual. In this group we can place the European socialists, who impose ruinous conditions for the countries of the union, such as the acceptance of a migration from the Muslim countries, which is producing great discontent in the places where the acceptance of these immigrants has been forced, producing the Brexit or separation from Great Britain and the refusal of countries that suffered the imposition of the socialist yoke such as Poland and Hungary.
It is worth asking: What can we expect in the USA?--- Trying to be impartial I think that the Republican party is not interested in socialism; but we see that in the ranks of the Democratic Party that ideology is promoted so as the clientelism that tends to that system. Historically in both parties there were conservative and liberal wings, but at present, politics has become polarized, at least in the Democratic Party, which has a tendency to extreme liberalism (radicalism) or socialism as we have already mentioned; and its militants, who call themselves "progressive" (movement that has as its mother socialism), threaten those who expose ideas that are contrary to them, promoting violent actions against the republicans; as well as civil disobedience, not accepting that they lost the elections legally .--- "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy". Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. ---This is one of the rules for radicals that Alinsky recommends.
We have read about the situation that occurred when Abaham Lincoln was elected to the presidency in 1860, and it seems that to a certain extent history is repeating itself. After the period in which Ronald Reagan governed, the behavior of democrat politicians has had a remarkable change, being very different the position of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (followers of Saul Alinsky) to that of John F. Kennedy.
Will the Democratic Party be for the negation of the negation? (To be continue).

In the primitive community there was no individual... (show quote)

TrueAmerican

peg w wrote:

Bring socialism on! We have had too much of the 1% picking our pockets.

TrueAmerican