Entitlement to the hard earned money of others is not a civil right. These people should all (except for the children) be deported to China and try protesting over there. Maybe they would gain an appreciation for the land of the free and the home of the brave.
They are just ticked off because they have to get off their couches when they expected the Empty Suit Known as Barack Hussein Obama would have already disbanded Congress and set up his politburo by now.
d(^_^)b http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/ "Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"
The constitution of the United States never outlines an economic system. Any basic research would reveal that Socialism and Communism (also known as capital "C" Communism) are rooted in the libertarian left and not the authoritarian left. Karl Marx was a libertarian. He advocated for a State run by direct democracy. It wasn't until later when Lenin and Mao came around that the terminology was corrupted, not to mention the politicians in the U.S. that stood to loose power if the country were to shift into a more libertarian position.
It's easier to think of the left like the denominations of Christianity. Mormonism is totally different than Christian Science, but they are both considered to be Christian religions. The same goes for the left. You may be a Socialist, but what kind of Socialist is more important. For example, all Socialsits define Socialism as democracy in the economy. But there are many different definitions of what democracy actually is.
Some of the groups there probably supported the position of direct democracy, which is inherently more democratic than what the U.S., especially the economy, functions under. However, some such as the CPUSA, support democratic centralism (invented by Lenin) which is the idea that all policy can be debated in a party until decided upon by majority decision and then all party members must follow the decision.
The problem with the argument in the video is that it tries to create a blanket statement for all the attending peoples, but as you can see, you can not make a unified group for all of the attendees.
Entitlement to the hard earned money of others is not a civil right. These people should all (except for the children) be deported to China and try protesting over there. Maybe they would gain an appreciation for the land of the free and the home of the brave.
ReplyDeleteThey are just ticked off because they have to get off their couches when they expected the Empty Suit Known as Barack Hussein Obama would have already disbanded Congress and set up his politburo by now.
ReplyDeleted(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"
Wisconsin, send the SEIU the clean up bill for the capital, if they refuse, dump all the trash on their business and home properties.
ReplyDeleteThe constitution of the United States never outlines an economic system. Any basic research would reveal that Socialism and Communism (also known as capital "C" Communism) are rooted in the libertarian left and not the authoritarian left. Karl Marx was a libertarian. He advocated for a State run by direct democracy. It wasn't until later when Lenin and Mao came around that the terminology was corrupted, not to mention the politicians in the U.S. that stood to loose power if the country were to shift into a more libertarian position.
ReplyDeleteIt's easier to think of the left like the denominations of Christianity. Mormonism is totally different than Christian Science, but they are both considered to be Christian religions. The same goes for the left. You may be a Socialist, but what kind of Socialist is more important. For example, all Socialsits define Socialism as democracy in the economy. But there are many different definitions of what democracy actually is.
Some of the groups there probably supported the position of direct democracy, which is inherently more democratic than what the U.S., especially the economy, functions under. However, some such as the CPUSA, support democratic centralism (invented by Lenin) which is the idea that all policy can be debated in a party until decided upon by majority decision and then all party members must follow the decision.
The problem with the argument in the video is that it tries to create a blanket statement for all the attending peoples, but as you can see, you can not make a unified group for all of the attendees.