by Bob Butler » Mon Jun 03, 2024 2:24 pm
You have to define the various labels for the words to have any meaning.
Marxism existed primarily in theory, but proposed that the revolutionaries would support and enhance the people. In practice, you got communists who would support and enhance the communists, who were in effect the state. As the time of revolutions passed, the members of the communist party were replaced by the oligarchs. In Russia, the name changed. This did not change the essence. The same people did the same stuff.
In the Gilded Age, we had our Robber Barons. With people like Jobs and Musk, they pretty much still exist, though use of the name has faded. These are our equivalent of oligarchs. Different names. Similar ability to amass wealth and influence the government. If you count the name change as important, you can support your obscure academic. I look at reality rather than names.
Supposedly the old traditional Republicans were gung ho anti communists. They were all for strength, preparedness and containment. In practice, it was the Democrats who acted in Korea and Vietnam. Of late in the Trump era, not so much. Putin is a Trump friend, Trump tried to delay aid to Ukraine and is proposing to leave NATO. Whether the name change is important or not, the new Republicans seem to be against containment and in favor of what the Russian communists have become.
There is also the domestic divide. The Democrats are pro labor, the Republicans pro management. Note Biden walked the picket line with the auto union while Trump visited a non-union shop in response. As a matter of abstract principle, this echos revolutionary favoring of the people or the communists.
The proposition that the Democrats are Communist is this strange at several levels. As I see it, the communists were never for the people, but were in it for themselves. But the Democrats are for the people not the autocrats. Isn’t the government supposed to be for the people?
Speak for yourself. Stop quoting obscure academics who no one has heard of. While you are at it, stop censoring viewpoints favoring your own opinions.
You have to define the various labels for the words to have any meaning.
Marxism existed primarily in theory, but proposed that the revolutionaries would support and enhance the people. In practice, you got communists who would support and enhance the communists, who were in effect the state. As the time of revolutions passed, the members of the communist party were replaced by the oligarchs. In Russia, the name changed. This did not change the essence. The same people did the same stuff.
In the Gilded Age, we had our Robber Barons. With people like Jobs and Musk, they pretty much still exist, though use of the name has faded. These are our equivalent of oligarchs. Different names. Similar ability to amass wealth and influence the government. If you count the name change as important, you can support your obscure academic. I look at reality rather than names.
Supposedly the old traditional Republicans were gung ho anti communists. They were all for strength, preparedness and containment. In practice, it was the Democrats who acted in Korea and Vietnam. Of late in the Trump era, not so much. Putin is a Trump friend, Trump tried to delay aid to Ukraine and is proposing to leave NATO. Whether the name change is important or not, the new Republicans seem to be against containment and in favor of what the Russian communists have become.
There is also the domestic divide. The Democrats are pro labor, the Republicans pro management. Note Biden walked the picket line with the auto union while Trump visited a non-union shop in response. As a matter of abstract principle, this echos revolutionary favoring of the people or the communists.
The proposition that the Democrats are Communist is this strange at several levels. As I see it, the communists were never for the people, but were in it for themselves. But the Democrats are for the people not the autocrats. Isn’t the government supposed to be for the people?
Speak for yourself. Stop quoting obscure academics who no one has heard of. While you are at it, stop censoring viewpoints favoring your own opinions.