The Left - Right Paradigm

NICE!!

In the Left - Right paradigm that I was taught in high school there is no room for freedom between Communism/Socialism on the left and Nazism/Fascism on the right.

That's because Communism, Fascism and Nazism are just minor variations of Socialism.

Right back when half the teachers weren’t avowed Marxists and Americans were taught to be proud

You can be a right wing authoritarian...like what the fascists were...

And the fact that political ideologies can be plotted on a line graph is absolutely stupid

Fascism is just Benito Mussolini's version of Socialism. If Socialism in a left wing ideology then clearly Fascism has to be also on the left.

You're still believing the nonsense. NO authoritarian governments are on the right. None! They are all left wing. That includes Fascism. Back in the early 20th century American liberals fell in love with Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini. They thought they were the men of the future. Then, after the NY Times tried to suppress it as long as they could, in the late 20's news of how evil the USSR was made it to America. Then Hitler's atrocities became known in the States. By the time we went to war with Germany the Socialists went underground and tried to pass off Nazism and Fascism as a right wing idea. They were so successful at it that it made into our schools.

If you put Communism and Socialism on the left and Nazism and Fascism on the right then where do you fit freedom? That is why what we have all been taught is absolutely ridiculous and it doesn't work. The far right is no government and the far left is total government. That is how it used to be taught before WWII.

You clearly have less than no idea how political ideologies work. You're literally just doing the meme "SoCiAlIsM iS wHeN tHe GuBeRmEnT DoEs StUfF aNd ThE mOrE sTuFf It DoEs ThE mOrE sOciAlIsTeR iT iS."

This is a nonsensical and politically illiterate definition of socialism. Like have you EVER heard of anarchism before? And by your definition, a monarchy would be socialist, which is wholly ridiculous.

The Nazis opposed almost every value held by socialists. They loathed equality, they embraced racism and anti-semitism, were heavily militaristic, were nationalist, were pro-private property, exterminated the weak, etc. Nothing done by fascists is even remotely close to socialism.

And let's not delude ourselves here. The "big government" you despise is social programs to help poor people. On the other hand, you'll be the first one to bootlick for the police state and the military, while ignoring the tyranny of corporations as well. Let's not even begin to count how many pro McCarthy "freedom loving" conservatives that are out there as well (I hope you're not one of them). Conservatism and freedom never mix together.

BobathianTheCarpenter. You're making a whole lot of assumptions about me. Socialism is not a monarchy but they share similar traits. Socialism is an oligarchy. Both oligarchies and monarchies put themselves above the people and consider the people expendable.

Socialism is a specific ideology and that ideology is not shared with monarchies. Socialism is the idea that if we all work together we can have everything through collective ownership. In practice that causes massive income inequality and severe poverty.

Of course I know what anarchism is. Did you not see where it is on the meme I posted? However, there are two types of anarchy right now. One has a specific goal in mind and it is not about remaining an anarchistic society. It is the idea of using anarchy to destroy our constitutional republic and replacing it with Socialism or Communism. The other anarchists, their end goal is complete self rule and no government at all. I can respect the second type of anarchist except there are too many narcissists in the world to leave them alone.

The problem with "big government" is that the bigger it gets the worse our standard of living becomes. Inventing social programs to help "solve" those problems only exacerbates the problems. The more band-aids we put on society to fix those problems the worse the problems become.

The reason is because Marxist or Keynesian economics are complete failures. They are big government systems that both cause the problems they claim they can fix.

The problem is that the more money the government takes out of the economy the worse the economy becomes. The less money they take the better the economy. It was very clearly evident when Hillary lost the election. The day after the election and before Trump even took office the economy went into a massive rebound. Why? Because faith had been restored that people and businesses would be freer. Then Trump lowered business taxes and that created jobs.

The best economic system ever created by mankind (and it is still is not perfect) is free market economics. Marx called it capitalism. The freer the people are the freer the market is. The freer the market is the more money in the hands of the people. It lifts all boats. The rich get richer and so do the poor. Both Karl Marx's or John Maynard Keynes's economic philosophy only make the poor poorer.

Once again, you're demonstrating your lack of knowledge about political ideologies. An oligarchy thrives under capitalism, not socialism (look at the US of A for an example). And again, you're conflating authoritarianism with socialism.

And no, collective ownership does not cause massive income inequality and severe poverty, that's what capitalism does. The wealth inequality present in America is the worst among the developed world.

Anarchy is the abolishment of unjust hierarchies. Anarchists want to abolish all hierarchies. Anarcho-capitalists claim to abolish unjust hierarchies, but then bootlick for corporations. They're replacing one form of oppression with another.

Your third paragraph is factually incorrect. The countries with the strongest social safety nets do better in terms of happiness, life expectancy, social mobility, economics freedom, etc etc etc. Look it up. And again, "big government" is not socialism. Social programs are not socialism. Welfare is not socialism.

Plus, as I said before, you don't actually hate "big government." You only hate it when it helps regular people.

The part about Trump made no sense. Trump inherited a strong economy from Obama, and his tax cuts did not spur any significant economic growth according to a CBO report, so once again, you're factually incorrect.

Please, I implore you to learn political ideologies better.

Bobba... It is clear that those who have educated you have failed. What you have just told me is the exact disinformation campaign that Marxists use to indoctrinate the non-thinking people.

Capitalism is nothing more or less than two parties exchanging a good and/or service with each other. Anyone who thinks it is more than that is an idiot. Capitalism is the natural state of being for an equitable exchange of goods and/or services. Marx had to lampoon Capitalism in order to defeat it and made all sorts of claims about what it wasn't. He even invented the word "Capitalism" just to lampoon it.

Everything you just said about Capitalism is directly from Karl Marx's writings.

The anarchy you described is the Anarcho-Communist model. Anarcho-Communists are all about fighting imaginary demons. This alleged "hierarchy" that you are talking about. It is based on the Marxist model of the oppressed/oppressor classes. We do not have an oppressed and oppressor class in the United States. It is Marxist mythology.

Capitalism by the very definition cannot be oppressive without corruption. But then that is true of everything. Corruption of any economic or political system can be oppressive. Socialism, however, is nothing but oppressive. But then Socialism is a corruption. It is either forced on people or sold as a lie to get people to accept it.

What you fail to grasp is that the bigger the government becomes the more money it has to take from you and me just to pay the government employees. That is a parasitic arrangement. In addition the bigger the government the more power it takes from the individual. That is NOT what this country was founded on.

Where the problem lies is what foundation you and I are building our ideologies on. I am basing it on facts, history, economics and most of all freedom of the individual. Your ideology is based on a false premise. It is founded on the lies of Marxism. And NO I am not calling anything I don't like Marxist. I am very specific about that. Marxism was very popular with Democrats in the early 20th century. They were very open about it. They publicly praised Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini and men of the future. The Marxists went underground when all of the atrocities committed those men came to light but they never gave up the Marxist ideology. It emerged again in the 1960's. And Marxism has totally consumed the Democrat party and a fair number in the Republican party as well.

The only one uneducated about political ideologies is you. You're projecting.

Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. And also, socialism can operate under markets (ie. market socialism). And capitalism is hardly voluntary. A single mom forced to work three jobs to sustain her family is not voluntary. Someone taking a terrible job because of the health insurance is not voluntary. Work or starve is not voluntary.

If you seriously believe that there is no oppressor class in America, then you are really, really ignorant.

Conservatives despise big government when it helps individuals, and.......get this.......increase economic freedom. You loathe basic social programs that objectively help the poor, increase their happiness, and the length of life. However, they adore big government when it is actually wielded to decrease freedom, whether that be through the police, the military, they're love for censorship (their love for Joseph McCarthy immediately comes to mind), etc.

I'm no history expert, but I guarantee you your explanation about "marxism" is utter BS. Marxism for starters is not an ideology, but rather a critique of capitalism and feudalism. Socialism is the ideology which replaces capitalism. The democrat party of old was extremely racist, which is antithetical to the tenets of socialism, which advocates for equality. The farthest left democrat I can think of in the early 1900's is FDR, and even then he's not a socialist, he just advocated for welfare policies, which worked. Additionally, the modern democrats as whole are in no capacity "marxist". 99% of them are liberals and 1% are social democrats (Bernie Sanders, AOC, etc). And since when were any republicans marxists lmaoooooooo. You claim that you don't call anything you don't like marxism, and then unironically call some members of the republican party marxist. That alone is an indication of your political illiteracy. What, Mitt Romney thinks black people shouldn't be killed by the police? Marxist I say. John McCain doesn't want millions to lose their health insurance? What a commie! Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins want to follow precedent set by the Republicans in 2016? Must be a big guberment leftist who hates freedom.

Please, please, please, I beg of you to learn the differences between political ideologies, because you're literally lumping fascism, socialism, marxism, liberalism, and conservatism all under the same ideology and it's really embarrassing.

Bobba... Is there some problem with private ownership of the means of production? Because government ownership means of production is the very definition of Socialism, Marxism, Nazism, Communism and Fascism. LOOK IT UP!!!! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.

Capitalism has NOTHING to do with a single mom being forced to work 3 jobs. Nothing at all. Like I said it is exclusively about the exchange of goods and/or services. Your Marxist argument is that the government should take care of the single mom by stealing money from the taxpayers.

In a free market SHE WOULD NOT HAVE TO WORK THREE JOBS to support her family. One would be fine. Do you realize that prior to the 1960's poor and lower middle class families did fine with just the father working? Why was that? It certainly wasn't because of Socialism because were were a lot less Socialistic then than we are now.

It is just a basic fact. Can you name one Socialist country that has ever existed where the people, including the poor, have all prospered. Name just one. I got time, I'll wait.

Now before you say anything you cannot include the Scandinavian countries. While they are more Socialistic than we are they had to pull back some. The Prime Minister of Sweden, for example, said we tried Socialism but is was about to collapse our economy so we had to pull back to a free market based system. Even so Denmark, for example, their taxes are so high that a car cost 3 times as much as what it costs us. I know this because I have a good friend who "escaped" from Denmark. Denmark also has the highest suicide rate in all of Europe. So despite what Bernie Sanders lied to you about they are NOT Socialist nations.

In order for it to be a Socialist nation then there must be government ownership of the means of production. Like Venezuela, Cuba, the former Soviet Union, China, North Korea and I am probably missing several others.

The fact of the matter is that there has NEVER been a Socialist nation where anyone except for the oligarchy prospered. LOOK IT UP!!!! The people live in abject poverty. Did you know that Venezuela was one of the most prosperous countries in South America until Hugo Chavez (and now Nicolas Maduro) became president. Now there are no more animals in the zoo because the people are starving and they killed and ate all of them. That is Socialism. LOOK IT UP.

Ok, you are once again demonstrating your lack of knowledge about political ideologies. Fascism and Nazism are wholly antithetical to socialism and communism. And none of the definitions of the ideologies you listed is "government ownership of the means of production". Socialism can be government ownership of the means of production, but not necessarily. That form of socialism is state socialism.

However, many other socialisms like democratic socialists, market socialists, libertarian socialists, etc. advocate for WORKER ownership of the means of production, which is what I would want. Government ownership of the means of production is nothing if exploitation, inequality, and democracy is suppressed. This is why I'm highly critical of the USSR for example. Using this definition, a monarchy can be "socialist".

Wait, you don't think people work three jobs in America? Did you really just say that? Because 13 million Americans work more than one job.

I never said Sweden was socialist. I've made that clear multiple times. You were, since you defined socialism as when the government does stuff, which is ludicrous. If the government ownership exacerbates inequality, enforces exploitation and oppression, and is undemocratic, then it is not meaningfully socialist. However, Scandinavian countries do have strong welfare states, which is undeniable (and which you despise). As for a successful socialist country, Evo Morales significantly cut poverty and economic inequality as a socialist in Bolivia. Worker co ops, which I advocate for, have been successful in places like Spain for example with the Mondragon cooperative. There are other examples of socialists bettering the condition of regular people, whether that was the sewer socialists of Milwaukee, the labor activists during the early 20th century, Tommy Douglas in Canada, Aneurin Bevan in the UK, and MLK Jr. during the civil rights era. All were socialists.

The problem with Joseph McCarthy is that did not have the authority to do what he did. No one in our government has that kind of authority. Nor should they. But that is what you get with big government. What was right about McCarthy is nearly 100% of those he accused of being a Communist was correct. He just had no authority to cause them to be persecuted and lose their jobs. But what you don't understand about those times is that Khrushchev was threatening to "bury us" and he was going to "destroy us from within". People back then lived in fear of the Soviets taking over or at least going to war with us. I came along at the tail end of all of that but I still remember having to get under my desk as part of air raid warnings.

Woodrow Wilson was further left than FDR. Teddy Roosevelt (FDR's distant cousin) became more left of center when he didn't win the Republican nomination and jumped in the newly formed Bull Moose Party. The Bull Moose Party was a Progressive party. FDR was pretty close to being a Socialist. His wife definitely was. What FDR was was a dickhead who liked to toy with people's lives. His New Deal just about killed this country. He prolonged the recovery much much longer and needed.

For example in 1919 Warren Harding was president. There was a stock market crash that year that was almost identical to the one that happened in 1929. Harding (and Coolidge who took over after Harding died in office) both understood how the economy works. They were free market guys and the did nothing. Within 18 months we fully rebounded from the 1919 crash. Hoover and FDR both thought they could "fix" the economy and all they did was make it much worse.

Racism does not have a political ideology. In can be in any of ideology. Marx was a lot like Hitler with his racism. He wanted all Jews exterminated. He made frequent use the the "N" word and described Africans as lazy and good for nothing. Marx also hated the Scots and a few other European groups as well.

You can find racists in every ideology. Hitler was a racist but Mussolini wasn't and yet they were both Nationalists. Hitler was to create the Aryan master race. Mussolini didn't care what race you were as long as you were an Italian citizen. If you weren't then he didn't have any use for you.

Joseph McCarthy didn't catch shit. Everyone he blacklisted and ruined the lives of were innocent, and his legacy is that many generations, yours included have a permanent strawman of socialism in which any policy that is even slightly left is tantamount to Venezuela. I mean, American discourse is so stunted to the right due to McCarthy so that even Republicans, REPUBLICANS are considered socialist.

Ayn Rand escaped from the Soviet Union and came to America as a political refugee. She knew first hand what Socialism is like to live under. You can also ask just about every Cuban refugee why they left such a "wonderful" Socialist country.

British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher also made the famous quote, "The problem with Socialism is sooner or later you run out of other people's money".

BTW there is a reason why the Communist clinched fist is identical to the Black Lives Matter clinched fist. Patrice Cullors, co founder of BLM (the organization not the movement) said, “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.” BLM (the organization not the movement) is a Communist movement that has very little to do with racial equality. They are just using the movement as what Josef Stalin called, "useful idiots". Hitler's group were the "brown shirts" and when Hitler was done with them he killed them. Because killing people is just was Socialists do. Socialism murdered around 100 million people in the 20th century.

You're making waaaaay too big of a deal about McCarthy. He ruined the careers of a few Hollywood actors and that is about it. I told you that what is did was wrong. He grossly exceeded his authority as a congressman. This is exactly what you get with big government. Neither Congress, the President or the Supreme Court has the right to destroy a persons livelihood just because of their personal beliefs. That doesn't mean that those branches of government haven't far exceeded their authority but under the Constitution they should be forbidden.

Obama really blew it when he started legislating private citizens could or could not do through executive order or executive statements. He stupidly opened that door and Trump has also gone through that door. In fact now that it has been opened by Obama it will never ever be shut again. That give dictatorial powers to the president that no president has ever had before (with the exception of Woodrow Wilson and FDR who were both world class jerks).

When Obama was president all the Dems were ecstatic over Obama's new unconstitutional power but now that Trump is president he's being called a dictator. The Republicans are now ecstatic about Trump's use of this power. Anyone who believes in the Constitution is (or should be) livid over both presidents use of that power.

Joseph McCarthy's actions were but a minor bump on the highway of history. His actions just did not have the effect that you think they did. He certainly did not make Socialists out of Republicans. Only greed and corruption can make a politician favor Socialist policies because they all favor those in government by stealing from you and me.

Taxation is theft. It is not our patriotic duty, it is theft. Our taxation scheme (invented by Socialist President Woodrow Wilson) was created not just to steal from us but to control us. Our current tax law is so powerful that on any given day every single American in the country is guilty of breaking at least 3 felony level laws. It doesn't matter how honest you are in paying your taxes or even if you over pay your taxes. Tax law is written to control the people and nothing else. And it was a Socialist who imposed it on us. Prior to Wilson we had no income tax in this nation. None.

I used Venezuela just as an example. I am still waiting for you to tell me of a Socialist nation where any of the citizens have prospered. Name just one.

I'm still waiting.....

This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen. Read a book.

I do read. I just don't read socialist propaganda. I know for a fact that in the early 20th century the Progressives openly praised Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin. They thought they were the men of the future. These are YOUR political predecessors. They were socialists who had absolutely no problem with Nazism and Fascism or Communism because they were all the same.

You're just going to have to accept the fact that your precious socialism has spawned 3 identical twins, i.e. communism, Nazism and fascism. That is part of YOUR legacy, not mine.

Fortunately my dad never saw combat but he enlisted in the army during WWII to FIGHT fascism and Nazism. He also opposed socialism and communism.

If there any fascist or Nazis in America they are within the socialist movement. Yes, I am aware that the American Neo-Nazis have left the Democrat party and joined the Republican party. That makes absolute no difference because there are a lot of other Progressives who infiltrated the Republican party. It is why I left the Republican party.

Where the problem comes is socialists and communists today have absolutely no clue what fascism is. You probably think it has something to do with racism but Mussolini wasn't necessarily a racist like Hitler was. But today EVERYTHING that isn't 100% in lock step with socialism is called racism which is just wrong.

I am just wasting my time trying to explain historical facts to you. You have decided that you want to believe history revisionism and you just cannot stand the idea that fascists and Nazis are politically identical to you. Nazis were the first Social Justice Warriors and social justice to the Nazis was exactly the same thing as what you socialists believe today minus the idea that all white people are born racists.

Mussolini embraced war, the socialists didn’t, then the fascists declared socialists a top enemy. The roots of fascism were to destroy the Socialist Party and stop the spread of communism. You are so out of touch dude.

The real question is when hasn't socialists embraced war?

The entire foundation upon what socialism is built on is division. There always has to be the oppressed and the oppressor and there always has to be friction to the point of violence between the 2 groups. Without that you cannot have your "Glorious Revolution".

The French Revolution was a horribly costly and bloody war to replace the monarchy with socialism. The Bolshevik Revolution was a repeat of the French Revolution.

Bill Ayers and Hillary Clinton have been friends since the 60's. Ayers tried to get Hillary involved with his Weather Underground. The Weather Underground wanted to foment a violent overthrow of the US Government. Hillary thought the better way was to bring about socialism from within the government.

Ayers and his gang set off a bomb in the Capitol Bldg in 1971. They caused more damage in inflation adjusted dollars than what happened Jan 6th. Fortunately no one was killed in the bombing. The only one killed on Jan 6th was one of the rioters was shot by the capitol police.

The Social Democratic Party of Germany split into the Communist Party because the former embraced war.

The provisional Kerensky government after the 1917 February revolution was overthrown by the communists because they would not end the war.

Socialists all over opposed entry into WWI, as I just illustrated. Berkman and Goldman were incredibly critical of Wilson’s motives.

You don’t need socialism to see the friction between the possessive class and the dispossessed. That is a struggle that has existed since the establishment of private property, and before Marx. You act like so many of the labor battles of the late 19th and early 20th centuries were unfounded and unnecessary. In Europe, workers were killed if they destroyed capitalist machinery. If they refused to work they were put in the miserable conditions of the workhouse where they were humiliated and degraded.

Many socialists will say, “no war but class war”, because we know we cannot throw off the upper classes without violent resistance. Personally, I see no problem with the oppressed organizing against their common oppressor, and using whatever means towards liberation.

Many socialists do oppose war. However that does not account for the fact that socialism is war. It may not involve killing anyone but it demands that people be convinced that there is an oppressor class and an oppressed class. In a lot of poor countries that already exists.

The problem the socialists have had in the United States is that there has never been an oppressor class. The rich are incapable of oppressing the poor in a free country. That is why socialists finally gave up on that and came up with a new oppressed/oppressor group. This time it is blacks who are oppressed. But there just weren't enough blacks so they came up with Critical Race Theory. This pits non-whites against whites. Whites are now the oppressor class because of idiotic notions like "white privilege" and "all white people are born racists".

However, a huge problem came up when it came to Asians because many Asians have a very strong work ethic and are driven to be the top in their fields. That is why Asians have now been classified as white. In fact if any "person of color" adopts the idea of working hard and actually becomes successful they are thrown in with the whites because they have adopted "western" values and "western" values are considered racist.

The concept of private property has existed since the beginning. It is always narcissists who want to take what does not belong to them for themselves. Monarchs, oligarchs and socialist/communist/Nazi/fascists are all malignant narcissists who want to control people.

Quite simply if you do not own your life, your property or anything then someone else does. If someone else does then you are a slave to that person or persons. There is just no way around that. You think it isn't so but that is exactly how it is. If you think it belongs to the collective then you are still in denial because the collective cannot make decisions for everyone. A central planner makes those decisions and you are right back to someone else owning you.

Private ownership has always been the bases of freedom. If you do not want to be free then go live some place where you own nothing like North Korea. Look how fun it is to live there.

Once again THERE ARE NO OPPRESSORS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Do you like Reddit, by the way?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRightCantMeme/comments/pd5vqf/perfectly_accurate_political_spectrum/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

I admit that was a crappy meme. The information is accurate and true. My problem is that I only have have ImgFlip and Microsoft Paint. So I am assuming that you are "TheRightCantMeme" and you put my meme on Reddit so your buddies can laugh at it.

Some of the comments on Reddit. One guy says that anarchy is both right and left. That is true but there is a HUGE difference between the right's anarchy and the left's.

The left's anarchy is a temporary position. Anarchy is just the tool that some Communists, like Antifa, are using to bring down the US government, the Constitution and capitalism. Once they have accomplished their goal then anarchy immediately changes to communism.

However on the right anarchy is just that. They aren't trying to bring down any political system, they just want to live outside of any government whatsoever. They do not want any government and most of all they do NOT want a socialist based government. I've met, both in person and online those kinds of anarchists. They make very solid points for having no government at all but I just think they are missing the fact that there are just far too many control freaks who will never leave them alone.

Another guy says Right anarchy is just feudalism. No. There is no king and there are no serfs. That is leftist anarchy that is feudalism, only they want an oligarchy running their lives.

Libertarianism is an interesting combination of Democrats who are disillusioned with the Democrat party, Republicans disillusioned with the Republican party and a whole lot of pot smokers who are there to legalize marijuana. It is really scary when the leftists who join the Libertarian bring all of their control freak ideas along with them because true libertarians have absolutely no use for them.

I am not a Libertarian but when it comes to economics they are spot on. More so than many Republicans. The Democrat party adopted Marxism as their economic philosophy. The Republican party leadership, for the most part, adopted Keynesianism. While the Republican voters, the Constitution Party and Libertarians adopted the principles of the free market that was promoted originally by Adam Smith but greatly enhanced by the Austrian school of economics and later the Chicago school. Such greats as Ludwig Von Mises, Frederick Hayek, Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell advocate for the free market.

The free market works. It has lifted more people out of poverty than any other political system devised by man. None of the others even come close. Socialism and all of its spin offs create poverty. It happens every where it has been tried. Under socialism the oligarchs get richer and everyone else become starvation level poorer.

https://www.liberationnews.org/exposed-mcdonalds-surveillance-operation-spies-on-employees-organizing-for-a-living-wage/

https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvzx7v/amazon-launches-another-union-busting-campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/14/full-time-minimum-wage-workers-cant-afford-rent-anywhere-in-the-us.html

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/17/1007805657/indigenous-activist-on-why-groups-are-protesting-the-line-3-pipeline-in-minnesot

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/12/01/american-billionaires-that-got-richer-during-covid/43205617/

Stop talking out of your ass. You are so wrong it’s literally not even funny. It sounds like you make this shit up as you go. I suggest you learn to stop lying and take a class on politics and history.

It is the responsibility of the individual to learn the skills necessary to get a job that pays more than the minimum wage. Somehow people have forgotten that the minimum wage was never meant to be a living wage. It was a wage for high school kids and college students. At some point in the last 20 years someone came up with the idea that the minimum wage is a living wage.

The other side of that is that every time the government raises the minimum wage it causes businesses to fire people and make their better workers work harder. So the ones that get fired are left out in the cold.

The solution is NOT to raise the minimum wage but to eliminate the minimum wage altogether. The government should NEVER have that much or any control over normal business operations. The only control is if a business violates the law. How they run their business is entirely up to them. That way there will be more businesses that survive their first year and more and better paying jobs.

But you're a socialist. You are incapable of understanding freedom or life without the government controlling every facet of your life. So there's no point in saying that each and every one of us are responsible for the wages that we accept, skilled our unskilled. Everything is negotiable in a free market and we don't need a union stepping in the middle of that negotiate and artificially raising wages above the value of the labor. And it is labor NOT the individual that value is being placed on. The individual is invaluable but their skills and knowledge is not invaluable. It has a negotiable value.

Unfortunately many Native Americans have been indoctrinated by socialists. I noticed the first thing that Tara Houska did was establish victim hood. That way you know right off the bat that she is a socialist who is playing the roll of the oppressed. And this time it is big oil who is the oppressor.

The truth is there are a gazillion oil pipes running all over this country. They run through residential, industrial, land in the middle of nowhere and even Native American reservations. As a matter of fact there are many Native American reservations that have gas stations on their lands near major highways or tourist attractions for the sole purpose of raising money for the reservation. Just like Casinos.

Tara Houska does NOT speak for all Native Americans. She just speaks for socialists.

How does Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk's wealth affect you? Is wealth finite?

Great! I went to your socialist website. Now I'm probably going to be put on some FBI watch list. On second thought. I am probably already on an FBI watch list since Obama was president. Not because of anything I did but because I am a conservative. The left considers the ones who built this country to be terrorists and not the ones who are actually trying to destroy it.

Amazon is the largest of the corporate socialist businesses. Socialism created unions to try to destroy capitalism. But it never worked and now unions are on their way out. They would have died out years ago if they weren't getting taxpayer dollars to prop them up. They should go the way of the dinosaur because they were created in this country by Marxists. Yes, I do know who Mother Jones was. Marxism and unions are based on the labor theory of value. A theory that had been proven false before Marx was born. It is the idea that labor should set the cost of a product. Where that fails is that leaves the consumer out of the equation and if the consumer sees a crappy product and has the choice to purchase a quality version of the same thing then it does not matter how much labor went into the crappy product, it fails. Socialism removes the choice of the consumer and says that you must buy the crappy product.

Then I looked at your 100 companies who are polluting the world. I had a thought when I read that headline. What US based companies are they going to target? My jaw hit the floor when I saw China at the top of the list. So are you socialists trying to throw your comrades in China under the bus? What's up with that?

Then I figured it out. All of those companies (or in China's case, the government) produce energy. The left and especially the radical left wants us all to go back to the horse and buggy days with Kerosene lamps to light our house at night. They seemed to think that because we have SOME alternative sources of energy then we have all that we need to live just like we live right now and they are ready to flip the switch and kill off all of those oil and coal companies.

Literally nothing you said is accurate. I am astonished how out of touch with reality you are.

Mussolini was a syndicalist, then embraced the war, met opposition, then denounced his views and embraced his own creation fascism.

You know what all socialists and communists are and always have been? Anti-fascists. Trotsky wrote about fighting fascism, Stalin’s Red Army is why the Nazis lost WWII. We have seen multiple actions by socialists and anarchists to fight fascism, including the battle of Cable Street in the 1930s and tons of socialist resistance to the Nazis in Germany. The Social Democratic Party adopted the Iron Front logo depicting three arrows, one against conservatism, the other against fascism, and the last against Soviet style communism. Hitler also tried to put this party out of existence and arrest and kill socialist organizing workers.

The predecessors of socialism are Marx and Engels, Kropotkin, Lenin and Luxemburg. No leftist today embraces Nazism, except maybe the fringe National Bolsheviks (but they embrace socially right-wing views).

What progressives do you think are in the GOP? What the literal f**k are you talking about?

You have no historical facts. You are the revisionist. You are a desperate right-winger whose source is probably Steven Crowder and are doing anything you can to make Hitler and Mussolini left-wing. But nothing about their rule was leftist.

I am not Steven Crowder and literally EVERYTHING I said is 100% verifiable fact. I am finished doing those long winded exchanges with you. I am wasting my time.

You can’t respond because you know you’re wrong and in denial of reality. You can’t just say everything you don’t like is socialism lmao

No dummy. I have a life. I don't want to spent my life having long pointless debates with you. It is a complete and utter waste of mine and your time. I am not going to change you and you are definitely NOT going to change me.

I would ask that you seriously go find some other nation who better suits your hopes and desires and stop trying to screw up MY nation. MY United States of America. There are plenty of countries who have fully adopted your anti-American political philosophy. And so you won't miss your friends and family you can take all of the ones who believe that socialism is beautiful with you. None of us Americans will mind or even miss you.