HOME | DD

Vengefulpadre In reply to ??? [2014-07-21 00:03:34 +0000 UTC]

You're welcome. And I do support that sentiment, Socialism is the best, I mean when done correctly. Even in it's worst form (Nazi) Germany was a powerhouse that quickly surpassed many countries who were better off initially. I think we just need to choose the right person for it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to Vengefulpadre [2014-07-21 00:36:02 +0000 UTC]

I would disagree somewhat, do remember that while it is true that socialism has its "right" and 'left" wings... , Hitler fashioned himself after Mussolini 's fascism .. and he pretty much only used the word "Socialist" because the largest party of the time were the socialist parties.. and what happens after he came to power?..... he killed the leaders of the socialist parties, imprisoned or killed other top socialist party members and shut down all of the socialist parties...  - - do remember, even Mussolini was kicked out of the Italian socialist party.

So, while SOCIALISM made a good point for Hitler, part of socialism is the people have power... not simply an authoritarian  above all.. Hitler gave the people little freedom in which would not swear loyalty .. while every large country no matter how small will have"bouts of socialism" .. be it just something as simple as government maintaining a few departments Hitler's Germany seemed more German Nationalism and Jingoism than true socialism.. though I concede that there is no such thing as "true" socialism given its many schools and thoughts - some contradictory to the others - - some contradictory onto themselves.

In general, I do not think even the most ardent socialist would want a 'strong leader" that no one can ever question without being killed and marked as a traitor.. what  good is socialism if the people are merely slaves to a system..

I do apologize for the long comment.. It did not seem that long in NOTEPAD when I was typing it

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Vengefulpadre In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-07-21 01:20:44 +0000 UTC]

oh it's fine, and the point as well. you're right about the leader thing, I just mean it would require a leader who won't abuse it, but also be someone you can respect, god forbid it be lead by someone like some of the USA's past presidents. It is a shame though that, whenever socialism is brought up, many automatically leap to Hitler's third reich, rather than Orwell or Trotsky.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to Vengefulpadre [2014-07-21 01:38:05 +0000 UTC]

Trotsky .. a man who made atheosemanon.deviantart.com/ar… my influence map... killed because he thought Stalin's regime was too powerful and did not give the people much of a voice. for a man, Trotsky, that in his own autobiography "My Life" he speaks that ultimate power should rests in the hands of the people and it is the people that should choose their leader.. I am paraphrasing of course since he spoke quite a bit about how a leader should be chosen.. I also agree on Orwell,

1984 pft, some of our government resembles what he was warning against, while I did vote for Obama in 2008 and 2012 because I agreed with him more than McCain and definitely more than Romney.. he was not my first choice in either election.. and I doubt my favorite Senator Bernie Sanders, also a democratic socialists, will ever run for higher office..

I think most people in general wants a mixed market economy, at least I do. I do not want a full public system with no private interests .. nor do I want a fully private system with no public interests

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Vengefulpadre In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-07-21 01:56:28 +0000 UTC]

I honestly despite usually supporting democrats, found myself against Obama, Romney I disliked a lot, but Obama takes credit for much of what was already going on (the hunt of rBin Laden, pulling troops out, ETC) I think it's just people are scared of the idea, I mean as I said, Socialism is usually associated with negatives, and no one is willing to take the risk. I forget the senators name but he ran for a few offices  (not the oval one but others) and was a Socialist, upon reaching the office, He gave it up completely, people are piss scared to address it. And as far as 1984 in reality, I see it more and more, and honestly fear for the future, our government is like a house of cards ,someone's going to come around and knock it down, drones, and the surveillance, I do believe some people exaggerate it to an extent, but when someone who has the volition to take over by force has those resources, it's all over.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to Vengefulpadre [2014-07-21 03:04:41 +0000 UTC]

The way the American system is now, sadly, it is more or less supporting the lesser of two evils. I would have given McCain a closer look, he was not so batshit compared to some but once he chose Palin eh.. and Romney.. just no, and once he chose Paul Ryan whose budget according to the CBO would cut taxes on the very wealthy but raise taxes most on lower and middle class...and somehow this would save the system in his trickle down belief. Obama is at best a moderate, at worst and more likely center-right.

I do not think people are scared of the idea of it as much as people are simply ignorant of many things and allow the media to tell them what to think. As stated, there are many schools of socialism, some I agree with an some I oppose - and if people actually looked into them and said specific things given a specific school that they disliked I would trust that much more than blanket statements of socialism is bad.. why.. it just is!!!

You forget his name, do you recall the state?

I do not have a general opposition to drones, I have a general opposition to tracking cell phones rather than flying a surveillance drone over to make sure that the person we are tracking is the one being killed, and trying to minimize as much as humanly possible the casualties - - you have some people who say if there is even a chance a casualty may die then do not do it - - it sounds great in sentiment, but in reality it is a bit unrealistic to believe that we can only ever strike where there is "no chance" of a casualty being hit or harmed.

the FISA courts needs to be reformed, some call for it to be done away with but I would oppose this. What needs to happen is you need someone to argue against the government vs just the court being a rubber stamp for the government.. preferably one approved by congress and working on behalf of congress the "people's representatives" against the federal government to maintain the balance of powers between the executive and legislative branch with the judicial branch of course being the court itself.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

zane1193 In reply to ??? [2014-04-04 15:48:30 +0000 UTC]

Atheos,I must congratulate you on yet another piece of "feel good" liberal propaganda,this is Kool-Aid poisoning at it's finest and impressionable high schoolers and stoner college kids are drinking it up!

Of course you haven't told them their standard of living will be at poverty level while the leaders of your utopian dream world will be among the idle rich,but hey,we'll all get "free" healthcare,right?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-04 15:51:05 +0000 UTC]

Sir, you just posted that same line in your other piece, will today be another day of you going through the gallery and commenting on a bunch of stuff but copy and pasting the same opening? aw, sweet.

Do tell me, sir, what utopian dream I have.. please do..

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-04 16:01:51 +0000 UTC]

LOL.

It's my new tagline for all your' "wonderful" posts,don't you like it?

Sigh...Still in denial I see.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-04 21:22:29 +0000 UTC]

so you speak of my utopia -  - thus you would have some idea of what it would be like  - -yet I ask you what is it and you cannot say  - - zane, zane.. the years have truly taken a toll I see  - - I mean you used to have some long rant about my utopia… and now.. thus.. tsk, tsk..

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 14:41:30 +0000 UTC]

Sigh...Atheos,you've written about it numerous times on your page,why tell you something you already know?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 14:49:44 +0000 UTC]

so if I have written about it numerous times and thus you have read it.. then it should be easy for you to say what is my utopia.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 15:01:23 +0000 UTC]

Part of your "utopia" would involve a sexual free for all of the vilest practices,as can easily be seen from your writings.

It truth,your Utopia would be a modern day blend of Sodom and Gomorrah, a rave at a crack house and a torture chamber for infants.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 15:04:00 +0000 UTC]

First premise - incorrect but that means you either have not read my pieces or make baseless claims as usual..

Second premise - false..

so basically you cannot say what my utopia is? fun times.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 15:13:41 +0000 UTC]

No,it's right on target.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 15:17:39 +0000 UTC]

Prove it.. as the burden of proof fallacy is that the one making the claim, that being you, must prove their own claim..
I await for this evidence.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 15:38:36 +0000 UTC]

All anyone has to do is attend a gay event such as the White Party Week in Miami,visit an Abortion Clinic and listen to Lib politicians speeches for legalizing illegal drugs.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 15:42:45 +0000 UTC]

I have attended "gay events" before, ... hm many gay couples having abortions? hm that would make an interesting future where same sex can reproduce hm ...

So can you prove your claim, sir... PLEASE do.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 15:49:14 +0000 UTC]

ROTFLMAO!!! I'm sure you have!

Now that was just stupi...wait a minute you're a Lib,that goes without saying.

I already have,you just didn't like my answer.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 15:56:45 +0000 UTC]

Yes, I have.. no shame in it for me, sir.

* I guess I should not say one of the gay events was a gay conservative guy getting married.. oops.. gay conservatives do not exist in Zane's world.. only liberals* bwhaha

making a claim without evidence is not proving your premise, sir.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 16:04:06 +0000 UTC]

Of course there wasn't.

They aren't really conservatives,they're RINOs.

Again,you didn't like my answer. You can keep repeating yourself if you want to but I will ignore any further comments,I've answered you,you just didn't like it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 16:11:13 +0000 UTC]

Well he was not a Republican at all, so unsure how he would be a "Republican in name only" if he was not a republican hm

lmao, I asked for evidence, you just says gays, abortion etc.. hm that is not evidence, sir. - - so after 4 years of commenting my stuff sir, you are going to ignore further comments? hm doubtful

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 16:17:24 +0000 UTC]

You said he was Conservative,did you not?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 16:23:22 +0000 UTC]

Yes, he is a conservative..surely you know one does not have to be a member of the Republican party to be a conservative..

Conservative is a political ideology, Republican is a political party.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 16:25:32 +0000 UTC]

No,but 's a RINO in principle nonetheless.

Yeah.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 16:32:33 +0000 UTC]

In order to be a RINO sir, you must be a republican..  though he considers himself more Ron Paul fan than what the establishment .. but perhaps to you, Ron Paul is also a RINO.. which is fine.. I mean at least Paul is a Republican... which would seem to be the most important part to be a RINO..

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 16:35:39 +0000 UTC]

You know exactly what I mean Atheos,stop splitting hairs.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 16:38:38 +0000 UTC]

Not really.. you claimed he was a RINO..when he is not a Republican.. which is essential part of being a RINO...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 16:44:16 +0000 UTC]

You want to play Lib Games,that much is obvious,but I've accomplished what I set out to do.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 16:54:58 +0000 UTC]

Lmao, you have set out to not prove any claims you make? bwhahaha well that is a quixotic goal

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zane1193 In reply to AtheosEmanon [2014-04-05 17:00:53 +0000 UTC]

No,I finally got you to admit the Founding Fathers would NOT have supported gay"rights" and most other Lib policies,that was the whole reason I commented on your site.

You can waste your time continuing this but I'll not respond to you.

Drink Kool-Aid and carry on.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to zane1193 [2014-04-05 17:04:37 +0000 UTC]

Yet we are not governed by what the founders believes, we are governed by the constitution and its many amendments most of which were made after the founding fathers were dead.. to which amendment in that which governs our laws can you prove yoru claim

PLEASE SIR, NAME ONE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVE YOUR CLAIM? JUST ONE!!!!!! there are 27 amendments in the constitution and you cannot pick a single one which would allow for gay Americans to not have the same rights as you bwhahahah bwhahaha bwhahahahahahahahahahaahhahahahhahahahahhahahahhahaha it is a thing of beauty.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ryu238 In reply to ??? [2014-02-28 03:45:57 +0000 UTC]

Funny how that never really worked out...

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

lucyfurry In reply to ryu238 [2014-03-02 01:37:53 +0000 UTC]

Such a stale argument. Who said true communism ever existed?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ryu238 In reply to lucyfurry [2014-03-02 03:42:18 +0000 UTC]

...well I suppose that is one way of looking at it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

AtheosEmanon In reply to ryu238 [2014-02-28 13:56:52 +0000 UTC]

Yes, many different schools and as you get larger.. it tends to collapse in on itself. It tends, from what I have seen not worked well on grand schemes without adjustments

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

joeisbadass In reply to ??? [2013-06-25 06:24:41 +0000 UTC]

Arrogant is right.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to joeisbadass [2013-06-25 17:05:06 +0000 UTC]

Oh yes, I agree... such arrogance..

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

joeisbadass In reply to AtheosEmanon [2013-06-25 18:20:53 +0000 UTC]

Yup

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LeRevolutionnaire In reply to ??? [2013-02-08 03:16:31 +0000 UTC]

great quote, love it, thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to LeRevolutionnaire [2013-02-08 15:27:17 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Emperor-sama In reply to extremerebirth1 [2013-05-03 23:19:49 +0000 UTC]

Communism can work, but it's never been given a chance to truely prosper because of fear media in non-communist nations. It's a vision of people getting equal opportunity and eradicating diverse social classes based on financial status.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

extremerebirth1 In reply to Emperor-sama [2013-05-03 23:53:19 +0000 UTC]

But humans aren't good enough for that to ever work

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Emperor-sama In reply to extremerebirth1 [2013-05-04 00:00:58 +0000 UTC]

The government is set up to prevent that. And because they may or may not lack resources not everybody has everything (Ex.: Cars in North Korea). On the other hand you have WAY too many greedy individuals in (let's say USA) where the standard of life social standing depends on your money and social reception and in a lower increase in intellectual bettering. In other nations (North Korea) it's better than that, but resource wise they cut purposefully cut out of the loop just because they are communist.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

extremerebirth1 In reply to Emperor-sama [2013-05-04 00:36:38 +0000 UTC]

Giving the government that much power would bring nothing but tyranny. NK is in its position because its communist. You need strong government for communism to work. Do you really trust the government with that much power

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Emperor-sama In reply to extremerebirth1 [2013-05-04 00:55:16 +0000 UTC]

I just said they're still hated for being communist. The government regulates things like a typical government, which explains the equal wages and no private property to add to individual wealth. People even chose to follow the ideas of communism (without the typical belief of a gun pointed at them) which speaks for itself seeing that the leaders can only do so much. The United States, to me, has too much power since the extreme elite don't have to listen to the common people whereas in a communist system the people are a primary factor for the government to exist.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

AtheosEmanon In reply to extremerebirth1 [2012-09-19 17:02:51 +0000 UTC]

I am not an absolutist to work under the confines of never and always, I shall leave that to you. While I am no communist nor would I wish for it, this was made, if you had read the artist comments, because a conservative called communist "selfish" for wishing for a universal health care system and properly funded education system.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

wilji1070 In reply to ??? [2012-07-14 17:07:49 +0000 UTC]

Y'know, this reminds me of a thing I saw on an althistory forum. It was called Reds. Basically, President McKinley is not assassinated which has the unfortunate effect of marginalizing reformers like Teddy Roosevelt, a far more brutal World War I and surprisingly, the United States undergoes a Communist revolution in 1932 when Hoover and General MacArthur declare the election void. The new country? The Union of American Socialist Republics [UASR].

From what I gathered, the UASR benefitted from having Leon Trotsky fleeing to America rather than Mexico. As a result of that, he is something of a best seller. The thing though that makes me wonder about somethings is that the UASR places a high importance on social activity and the frowning upon individualism. Even more remarkable is that the USSR still ends up in a Cold War with the Americans.

But, even pre-Junta parties like the Conservative Democrats and Republicans are allowed a say in what goes on in the Republic's political processes. Hell, the South is considered highly conservative despite it having the air of California and New York while the traditionally Liberal states are considered to be like Amsterdam.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

AtheosEmanon In reply to wilji1070 [2012-07-14 20:38:58 +0000 UTC]

As you know, I am a huge fan of Trotsky, I have not seen this show or whatever althistory is, but it sounds like a very interesting topic in an "what if..." sort of way.

... I am against any impede on individualistic actions, yet also am for doing things for the betterment of society as a whole.

Amsterdam, sounds lovely.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1