Tag: communism

So, Karl Marx has a statue now

One of the most evil and demented men in history He helped birth Communism, which has killed more than 100,000,000 people and tortured/imprisoned/enslaved countless millions more

 A larger than life statue of Communist philosopher Karl Marx was unveiled Saturday on the 200th anniversary of his birth in the western German town of Trier.

The celebratory uncovering of the 4.4-meter (14-foot) bronze statue of Marx, donated by China, sparked criticism by some who blame Marx for crimes committed by social revolutionaries in Russia, China and elsewhere in the name of Communism.

About 200 guests, including a delegation from China, applauded during the anniversary celebrations, when a bright red cover was lifted from the statue which depicts Marx with a frock and his signature bushy beard.

Marx laid the philosophical foundations for Communism, an ideology that aims for shared ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes. He explained his thoughts in two famous works, the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital.

 

You really want equality?

Oh how communists pedal the ideal of equality. And how fools lap it up

For those who believe income inequality is a major issue with capitalism, Cuba provides a perfect example of how socialism and communism conquered this problem. The communist Castro dictatorship has achieved income equality in Cuba by ensuring — at the point of a rifle — everyone is equally poor and miserable. The probabilities of any Cuban reaching any economic class higher than impoverished without being an elite of the communist party or having political connections to those in power on the island are slim to none.

While some may believe income equality is a monumental and nearly impossible task, Cuba’s Castro dictatorship has shown that is quite easy. All you need to do is have the state confiscate all the money, property, and assets of the population and turn everyone into a pauper.

Everyone is equally poor, except of course, those in power who are doing the confiscating. They get to live like kings, jet-set around the world, hang out with celebrities, and enjoy yacht vacations on the Mediterranean. But if you really want to stamp out “income inequality” and make the masses economically equal, that is the price you will have to pay.

Income equality? A very idealistic notion, but, in communist nations like Cuba, well, equality of destitution is the reality

Cuba has income equality.  Verifying this requires a careful look at the data.  Most sources – for example, Brookings – cite a per capita income of about $240 per year.  Wikipedia cites about $22,000 per year, so be careful with your information sources.  The government employs 78% of the workers, so there is little opportunity to get an income very different from the average.  How can people survive on a salary of practically nothing?  Thanks to the government, Cubans get free food and medicine.  They get subsidies for virtually everything they might buy.  As a result, someone getting no salary is only slightly worse off than someone with a relatively high income.  In all practicality, Cuba has as close to income equality as a society can provide.

Cuba also has abject poverty and child prostitution.  Before the 1959 revolution, Cuba exported $780 million (1959 dollars) of goods, mostly food.  Now it imports 70% to 80% of the food that it consumes.  The result is that Cubans risk their lives in shark-infested waters to escape.

See equality works, and all it will cost you is any chance of prosperity, and liberty. 

Communism fails because people eat?

Via Moonbattery. I don’t think additional commentary is needed here. From the mouths of Communist swine…………

No need to be terrified into turning away from Democrats’ agenda by its application in other countries; officials assure us that Venezuelan shelves are empty not because socialism has been imposed but due to the traditional capitalist sin of gluttony:

Venezuela’s former Vice President turned Minister of Education Elías Jaua claimed in remarks this weekend that the country’s depleted supermarkets would be full of food if people did not eat so much.

Jaua praised the socialist Bolivarian Revolution for bestowing upon the People the “right to eat meat, chicken, milk, that they did not have ten, 14 years ago.” Back then it was the other way around; they had the food, but allegedly no right to eat it. Now they have the right, but no food.

Bellows Jaua:

“If the Venezuelan people did not eat, surely the shelves would be full.”

Obama In Argentina: Communism, Socialism And Capitalism Are All The Same (Video)

Obama Has His Say on Communism, Socialism And Capitalism… They’re All The Same – Independent Sentinel

.

.
Barack Obama told an audience of Argentinian youth that the differences between socialism and capitalism make interesting conversation but just pick whatever works. The ideological-left U.S. president suddenly doesn’t have an affinity for ideology.

He said in the past there was a sharp division between communists, socialists and capitalists but that is merely an intellectual argument and it’s not so today.

The Marxist in the White House is erasing the lines between two dangerous ideologies and the one that made the U.S. great, just as he erased our borders. This is a man who would be at home in communist China.

“So often in the past there has been a division between left and right, between capitalists and communists or socialists, and especially in the Americas, that’s been a big debate,” Obama said at the Buenos Aires town hall.

“Those are interesting intellectual arguments, but I think for your generation, you should be practical and just choose from what works. You don’t have to worry about whether it really fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory. You should just decide what works.”

For Obama, high taxation, wild spending, government agency domination over the people and heavy regulations work which tells you what he is.

Obama made his comments in response to a question about establishing nonprofit community organizations and said it’s important to get government and private sector investment, which for him is a sketchy relationship between Wall Street and DC.

“To president Castro, I said you’ve made great progress in educating young people [Cuban dictators indoctrinate its youth]. Every child in Cuba gets a basic education. Medical care, the life expectancy of Cubans is equivalent to the United States despite it being a very poor country because they have access to health care. That’s a huge achievement,” he said about the repressive regime. “They should be congratulated. But you drive around Havana and you see the economy is not working. It looks like it did in the 1950s.”

The US president likes socialism but also likes the capitalism, both of which he has subscribed to for the last seven years.

Then he told them not to rigidly adhere to labels as if the systems of socialism and capitalism are mere labels.

“You have to be practical in asking yourself, How do you achieve the goals of equality and inclusion, but also recognize the market system produces a lot of wealth and goods and services and innovation and it also gives individuals freedom because they have initiative, depending on the social issues you are trying to address, what works? What you’ll find is the most successful societies and economies are the ones that are rooted in a market-based system but also realize a market does not work by itself. It has to have a social and moral and ethical and community basis.”

His love of wealth redistribution and social [unfair] justice trumps all.

During his trip, he told the Cuban dictator that his revolution was like ours – it was a liberation movement – and he told Argentinians earlier in the week that he is frustrated with the separation of powers.
.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related article:

.
FLASHBACK 2012: Socialist Or Fascist – Thomas Sowell

It bothers me a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a “socialist.” He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.

What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector.

Politically, it is heads-I-win when things go right, and tails-you-lose when things go wrong. This is far preferable, from Obama’s point of view, since it gives him a variety of scapegoats for all his failed policies, without having to use President Bush as a scapegoat all the time.

Government ownership of the means of production means that politicians also own the consequences of their policies, and have to face responsibility when those consequences are disastrous – something that Barack Obama avoids like the plague.

Thus the Obama administration can arbitrarily force insurance companies to cover the children of their customers until the children are 26 years old. Obviously, this creates favorable publicity for President Obama. But if this and other government edicts cause insurance premiums to rise, then that is something that can be blamed on the “greed” of the insurance companies.

The same principle, or lack of principle, applies to many other privately owned businesses. It is a very successful political ploy that can be adapted to all sorts of situations.

One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left.

Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely – and correctly – regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg’s great book “Liberal Fascism” cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists’ consistent pursuit of the goals of the left, and of the left’s embrace of the fascists as one of their own during the 1920s.

Mussolini, the originator of fascism, was lionized by the left, both in Europe and in America, during the 1920s. Even Hitler, who adopted fascist ideas in the 1920s, was seen by some, including W.E.B. Du Bois, as a man of the left.

It was in the 1930s, when ugly internal and international actions by Hitler and Mussolini repelled the world, that the left distanced themselves from fascism and its Nazi offshoot – and verbally transferred these totalitarian dictatorships to the right, saddling their opponents with these pariahs.

What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people – like themselves – need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.

The left’s vision is not only a vision of the world, but also a vision of themselves, as superior beings pursuing superior ends. In the United States, however, this vision conflicts with a Constitution that begins, “We the People…”

That is why the left has for more than a century been trying to get the Constitution’s limitations on government loosened or evaded by judges’ new interpretations, based on notions of “a living Constitution” that will take decisions out of the hands of “We the People,” and transfer those decisions to our betters.

The self-flattery of the vision of the left also gives its true believers a huge ego stake in that vision, which means that mere facts are unlikely to make them reconsider, regardless of what evidence piles up against the vision of the left, and regardless of its disastrous consequences.

Only our own awareness of the huge stakes involved can save us from the rampaging presumptions of our betters, whether they are called socialists or fascists. So long as we buy their heady rhetoric, we are selling our birthright of freedom.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related video:

.

.

.

UN Climate Chief: How Do You Fight Global Warming? Why, COMMUNISM, Of Course!

UN Climate Chief: Communism Is Best To Fight Global Warming – Daily Caller

United Nations climate chief Christiana Figueres said that democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China, she says, is the best model.

.

.
China may be the world’s top emitter of carbon dioxide and struggling with major pollution problems of their own, but the country is “doing it right” when it comes to fighting global warming says Figueres.

“They actually want to breathe air that they don’t have to look at,” she said. “They’re not doing this because they want to save the planet. They’re doing it because it’s in their national interest.”

Figueres added that the deep partisan divide in the U.S. Congress is “very detrimental” to passing any sort of legislation to fight global warming. The Chinese Communist Party, on the other hand, can push key policies and reforms all on its own. The country’s national legislature largely enforces the decisions made by the party’s Central Committee and other executive offices.

Communism was responsible for the deaths of about 94 million people in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan and Eastern Europe in the 20th Century. China alone was responsible for 65 million of those deaths under communist rule.

Environmentalists often hail China as a model for fighting global warming, since they are a “leader” in renewable energy. The country set a goal of getting 15 percent of its power from renewable sources by 2020. In 2012, China got 9 percent of its power from renewables – the U.S. by contrast got 11 percent in 2012.

However, the country still gets 90 percent of its power from fossil fuels, mostly from coal. In fact, Chinese coal demand is expected to explode as the country continues to develop. China has approved 100 million metric tons of new coal production capacity in 2013 as part of the government’s plan to bring 860 million metric tons of coal production online by 2015.

China has publicly made big efforts to clean up its environment. The country’s booming industrial apparatus has caused so much pollution that the skies have been darkened over major cities and the air quality has heavily deteriorated.

The Wall Street Journal notes that China’s air quality was so bad that about “1.2 million people died prematurely in China in 2010 as a result of air pollution” and Chinese government figures show that “lung cancer is now the leading cause of death from malignant tumors. Many of those dying are nonsmokers.”

The Soviet bloc’s environmental track record was similarly dismal.

The Communist Party’s National Action Plan spent $275 billion to combat rampant pollution through 2017, including reducing particulate matter 2.5 levels in the Beijing region by 25 percent.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Nelson Mandela, Communist, is dead UPDATED!

Communism, despite what the Left tells us, is evil, if you do not believe me, just look at the death toll under Communism in the last century. More than 100 million lives lost for the “greater good”. How many tens, or hundreds of millions more suffered torture, destitution, and loss of liberty under Marx’s Utopian Fanaticism? So, forgive me if I do not mark the passing of any Communist with sorrow. I see Communists for what they are, and that is people who would take every liberty I have and eradicate it. I will never grieve over the death of any Communist, no matter how the Left attempts to deify them. Robert Stacy McCain has some historical perspective on Mandela you need to read, here is but a snippet, and one photo that, to me, says enough about Mandela for me not to mourn him

“It’s a tragedy what is happening, what Bush is doing. All Bush wants is Iraqi oil. There is no doubt that the U.S. is behaving badly. Why are they not seeking to confiscate weapons of mass destruction from their ally Israel? This is just an excuse to get Iraq’s oil. . . .
“If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America.”
– Nelson Mandela, Jan. 30, 2003

Nelson Mandela was at all times a man of the Left — anti-Western, anti-American and anti-Israel — as attested by the fact that as late as 2003, he could say, “All Bush wants is Iraqi oil,” make a sneering reference to Israel, accuse the U.S. of “unspeakable atrocities,” and even play the race card over the Iraq War:

Bush is now undermining the United Nations. . . . Both Bush, as well as Tony Blair, are undermining an idea which was sponsored by their predecessors. They do not care. Is it because the secretary-general of the United Nations is now a black man? . . . They never did that when secretary-generals were white.

Mandela’s tenure as president of South Africa was, thank God, not the nightmare that Mugabe inflicted on neighboring Zimbabwe, but we ought not be fooled by liberal myth-makers who wish to reinvent Mandela as a secular saint whom all are obligated to revere.

Of course, The United States and Israel, they are the evil nations. And to the Left, to Marxists, nations that reject Totalitarianism are evil. Because to the Left Individualism, and honoring God-given rights is evil. To the Left, only the Collective is good and noble, no matter how many people their beloved Collectivism/Marxism slaughters and tortures. You can criticize me for daring to share historical facts, but ask yourself this. What type of man would pose in front of this symbol? The symbol of Gulags, torture, butchery, and mass suffering? is that man worth celebrating? I will let you decide that for yourself. For me, it is rather cut and dry.

BawNpVeIIAA8BYL

Also, you need to read what Bob Belvedere, who loathes Communists as much as I do writes about this

The sickeningly sweet sycophancy has already started and will most assuredly continue at least until the old Marxist is buried — one hopes very soon.  TV News will become even more unwatchable.

In the face of the avalanche of BS that will be said of Mandela, there will be a temptation among many on the Right to start to think well of him.

From his file at Discover The Networks:

…The leading South African socialist parties merged with the Communist Party in 1920s, and in 1923 the South African Native National Congress changed its name to the African National Congress to reflect its growing internationalist, Communist outlook.

In its early phase, the group focused on non-violent resistance; Mandela, his future law partner Oliver Tambo, and several other young African students in and around Witwatersrand established the African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL).  Mandela was one of the drafters of the group’s manifesto. The ANCYL criticized the more genteel ANC and promised to politicize and radicalize the movement.  It succeeded.

And…

Sharpeville also marked a definite turning point for Mandela and other members of the ANC, who now opted for the use of force to accomplish their political agenda.  An offshoot militant wing, the Umkhonto we Sizwe (UWS), the “Spear of the Nation,” was created by Mandela and others to bring the apartheid government down by use of sabotage.  Mandela went underground and eventually left the country without permission, training in terrorist camps in Algeria and addressing the Pan-African Freedom Movement conference in Addis Ababa in January 1962.  His speech was a masterpiece of one-sided distortions, as he condemned the South African government for atrocities like Sharpeville or Bulhoek (a 1921 incident in which government officers, attempting to enforce an eviction warrant on squatters, were attacked by a mob of religious fanatics and returned fire, killing 163; Mandela refers to them as ‘unarmed’, an adjective not supported by accounts at the time), invariably oversimplifying the complex background of each incident.  He spoke approvingly of bombings in Fort Hare, Durban, and Johannesburg, and claimed that he was sending ANC members for guerrilla training.

Mandela returned to South Africa in 1962 and while in custody, was arrested and tried in the Rivonia trials.  Rivonia was the headquarters of a group of saboteurs accused of blowing up not only government buildings but also the homes of government officials.  Mandela did not deny that he was a member of the UWS and that it was engaged in sabotage, but claimed that the UWS did not engage in bombings of private homes.  He also denied the possibility of finding real justice in a “White Man’s Court”.

Sometimes lost in the reports of the trial was a document that South African police found when they raided the UWS headquarters, the plans for Operation Maribuye, which detailed the targets that the UWS intended to hit and listed the strategic and tactical considerations that the group should consider.  It is, in effect, a plan for war, and contrary to the rhetoric of the ANC and Mandela, both at the trial and in subsequent years, the UWS saboteurs had already claimed lives as well as buildings for their victims.

Mandela was convicted and sentenced to life in prison….

During his imprisonment, the ANC unleashed a reign of terror and torture that has been well-documented.  In 1997, during the TRC hearings, the ANC leadership admitted to at least 550 actions carried out by its UWS wing, with another 100 incidents that “may or may not” have been carried out by members acting on their own.  The terrorist attacks included the infamous “necklacings,” in which attackers put a gasoline-soaked tire around the victim’s neck and then set it afire (a tactic often ascribed to Mandela’s wife, Winnie, and her followers), bombings of government and military installations, and the establishment of secret “re-education” camps in northern Angola, Tanzania, and Uganda where the ANC would torture those reluctant to go along with its program of violence.   In addition to warring with the apartheid government, the ANC often battled other black groups, particularly the Zulu-led Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP).  The government, for its part, employed equally violent means of quelling black resistance.  The death totals for the period from 1985-1994 reached 23,000, according to the TRC.

As I said, read it and then decide for yourself

UPDATE! Donald Douglas joins RS McCain, Bob Belvedere, and myself in tapping stomping on the brakes on the Mandela Lovefest Bandwagon

We know that Mandela, in his membership with the African National Congress, was a terrorist and Communist, even though his ties to the Moscow-led revolutionary world program were disguised at the time. Here’s Telegraph UK from last year, “Nelson Mandela ‘proven’ to be a member of the Communist Party after decades of denial.” (And see the fascinating contemporary piece from Thomas Karis, at Foreign Affairs, “South African Liberation: The Communist Factor.” Also, here’s a communique from South African Communist Party Leader Joe Slovo from 1989, “Message by Joe Slovo, General Secretary of the South African Communist Party, to the Soweto rally for the released ANC leaders.”)

In any case, it’s no surprise that we’re seeing overwhelming acclaim for Mandela’s legacy from the left and the right, although it’s pretty pathetic that even so-called conservatives are attempting to tamp down the meme that Mandela was a Communist.

I am proud to be one of the few to have the guts to tell the truth! 

Remember the promises of Communism are sweet, the realities evil

90 Miles From Tyranny takes us to one of the places where Communism showed its evil head, Cambodia. Amazingly, despite the lessons of Cambodia, China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, East  Germany, and many other “Communist Utopia’s” so many on the Left still say Communism just has not been implemented correctly. So many on the Left refuse to grasp that many of the ideals they embrace are Communist in nature. They refuse to see that embracing Communism in any form is like knocking down that  first domino. What is that they say about those who forget history? Yeah, you know the rest

This organization is remembered especially for orchestrating a Genocide, which resulted from the enforcement of its social engineering policies. Can You guess? No, It is not the Obama genocides (not yet anyways), it’s our cute commie friends the Khmer Rouge or Red Khmers.  The Khmer Rouge wanted to eliminate anyone suspected of “involvement in free-market activities.” Suspected capitalists encompassed professionals and almost everyone with an education.  Now who would want lots of people with poor education?  Oh, that’s right, Democrats.

The Khmer Rouge believed that parents were tainted with capitalism, so they separated children from their parents and indoctrinated them in communism.  And That would be happening now in where?  You got it, common core classrooms, in the good ole USSA.

The post is long, but you should read it, and if possible, get a Liberal friend to read it. Here is a bit Mike Miles linked from another blog

We are not the first to arrive here, and at first I cringe at the bus loads of well-fed tourists mulling about with their headsets on. They are listening to an audio-tour, no different than a day out at an art museum and the contrast to the starvation and suffering on these grounds 30 years ago was too much to handle for me.  But within a few minutes of listening in, I realize how important it is for people to come here and learn about the genocide unleashed on Cambodia by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.

In school, we learn about Nazi Germany under the pretext that genocide must never happen again, yet no mention was made of Cambodia, where the Khmer Rouge killed anyone who was educated or spoke foreign languages, while others were forced to work in labor camps. Over 25% of the population, or 2 million people, were killed from 1975-1979, in order to create the all-agrarian society Pol Pot believed was necessary in order to free Cambodia and make it independent of outside influence.
Visualizing how the ground bubbled up as gasses from the 20,000 buried bodies were released. Seeing the clothes that had rotted off the victims still scattered on the ground, partially exposed by wind and rain. Standing in front of the Killing Tree, against which Khmer Rouge soldiers bashed babies and their mothers like sacks of potatoes until they died; the price of bullets too precious to waste.
Stop 18, the last stop on the walking tour, brings you to the massive pagoda, the center point of what is now a memorial park. Over 9,000 skulls are piled inside this 17-storey structure, along with bones and more piles of clothing. Witnessing this makes the scale of the killing truly tangible. As at other points of the tour, I am immediately sick; nausea mixes with a piercing pain in my temples and an angry fire in my heart and my stomach too hard to explain.
We learn at our next stop, the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum, that of the 20,000 people who were tortured at this former prison, only seven people survived. Around the country there was a much higher rate of survival, but here at S-21, just stepping through the doors meant sentencing to months of torture before eventual death.
Before we stepped through the doors, however, we were confronted by a legless blind man begging for money outside. I decide he is, no doubt, a victim of the regime, who now spends his days outside one of the darkest locations in Cambodia’s history.
Passing through the doors, thousands of fearful eyes stare back at us, in the form of black and white photographs. Head shots of every single man, woman and child brought to this detention center were taken, methodically documented their arrival. I stare at photograph after photograph choking back tears, knowing that if I let one fall, I won’t be able to stop.
I worked with a girl a few years ago who was Cambodian, her name was Sineath, she was beautiful, and very sweet. If I had been 15  or 20 years younger, I might have fallen in love with her. Her parents came to the US before she was born, but she knew the history of Cambodia. So I did some research into Cambodia, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. It was heartbreaking, especially those pictures they spoke about. The bastards in the Khmer Rouge kept detailed records of their evil atrocities, and the worst, by far were the pictures. Especially those pictures of children, all slaughtered in the name of the foundation of Communism, the common good.
I write a lot about Individualism and Collectivism. Cambodia is a glaring example of where Collectivism leads. Such horrific suffering and evil is the natural end to Collectivism because Collectivism seeks to eradicate every last vestige of individual liberty. Once those liberties are sacrificed upon the altar of the common good, well, let tens of million Russians, Chinese, Cambodians, North Koreans, Cubans, and Eastern Europeans answer that.