UA-9726592-1
Showing posts with label communism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label communism. Show all posts

Sunday, December 23, 2012

The Political Spectrum

First, let's look at the international political spectrum


As you can see, the authentic international left is made up of communists and socialists  The right is populated by conservatives and fascists.

The people with the tin foil hats are called radicals on the left and reactionaries on the right.

Now let's look at the political spectrum in the US House of Representatives courtesy of Nate Sliver:


It should be obvious in the House there is really no significant left wing caucus. The Democratic progressive caucus is part of the liberal Democratic wing. However, in the Senate  there is one socialist, Sen, Bernie Sanders.

The Blue dog Democrats often vote with the GOP so they are actually center right Democrats.

The US liberal movement is essentially centrist. This is true for the liberal party in the UK, too,  as shown in the political  poster from Liverpool.
The liberal movement started more than 200 years ago during the French and American revolutions. It is a centrist philosophy today that developed as a counterpoint to European monarchies.


The Establishment or country club Republicans are status quo conservatives.

Many of the Tea Partiers are fascists. Allen West is good example of a fascist Republican. So are Michelle Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry and Louie Gohlmert.

It should e clear that after the past two elections, the US electorate has shifted to the center from the center right.

The GOP, on the other hand,  has shifted from the right and descended into far right fascism. Fascism is another word for corporatism. On author has stated that corporatism is the first stage of fascism
There really is no coherent left wing political movement in the US as there is in Europe  This is why European politics are so different from those in the US.

source: http://thewhitedsepulchre.blogspot.com/2011/08/king-barack-declares-that-fuel.html

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License

Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Monday, August 27, 2012

Wikipedia: What is libertarainism?


The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines libertarianism as the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights . . .

According to the U.S. Libertarian Party, libertarianism is the advocacy of a government that is funded voluntarily and limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.

Libertarian schools of thought differ over the degree to which the state should be reduced. 

Anarchistic schools advocate complete elimination of the state.

Minarchist schools advocate a minimal state which is limited to protecting its citizens from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. 

Some schools are supportive of private property rights in the ownership of unappropriated land and natural resources while others reject such private ownership and often support common ownership instead.

Those on the right support a capitalist economy; on the left a socialist economic system.

Political scholars such as Noam Chomsky assert that in most countries the terms "libertarian" and "libertarianism" are synonymous with left anarchism.

Rightardia suggests there are two groups of the anarchists and minarchists in the US: those on the left personified by the Occupy Movement and those on the right led by the two Pauls: Ron and Rand. it is unlikely the two groups have much in common or could ever work together. 

Monday, July 23, 2012

Al Jazeera English: Why so many communist philosophers?



Against Fukuyama's predictions, the Occupy movement and the Arab Spring demonstrated that history calls once again for a new beginning beyond the economic, neoliberal, and international paradigms we live in. A number of renowned philosophers (Judith Balso, Bruno Bosteels, Susan Buck-Mors, Jodi Dean, Terry Eagleton, Jean-Luc Nancy, Jacques Ranciere, and others), led by Slavoj Zizek, have began to envision how such beginning would look in communist terms, that is, as a radical alternative.


Decentralized or non-statist communism would be a huge departure from the Stalinist  and Chinese models. China is a communist state but this mainly applies to the large cities. The countryside is very rural and traditional.


Certainly, an alternative is needed to US neo-liberalism, but it won't be communism. Socialism is even an unpopular word in the US. 


Most conservatives consider the US as a firewall to communism and socialism. 


Probably the biggest social reforms that could occur in the US would be the strengthening of the labor movement, something Democrats in Washington seem to be reluctant to do. 

In addition, the most affluent Americans need to be taxed at higher rates for income tax and capital gains. 


The Estate tax needs to be restored.This should help restore some of the vitality to the middle calls. 


However, although Obama is likely to win the presidential election, the House may stay in GOP hands and the Senate is up for grabs according to Intrade. 

Why so many communist philosophers? - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA

Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Al Jazeera English: When they say 'communist', you say 'whatever'



"As in the past, Republicans and conservatives use "communism" as a wedge issue to distract us from what's important, such as workers' rights and economic injustice. The difference between the past and present, however, is obvious. There is no communist threat to the US. "Communism" can't be a wedge anymore. Yet the more they apply the rhetoric of the past to the politics of present, the more they appear out-of-touch."


graphic source: OCCASIONAL LINKS & COMMENTARY

See When they say 'communist', you say 'whatever' - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

 Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA
Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Monday, June 13, 2011

Crunch myth about China's military threat

(Xinhua)

Updated: 2011-06-13 11:06

BEIJING - A deadly killer jet that can take on the most advanced military fighters of the world's sole superpower.
A behemoth "ship" under construction that will project the military power of the "Middle Kingdom" further off its coast. 
An army of cyber hackers ready to do all the havoc on the Internet.
These days, news stories by some Western media about China's military strength tend to play up its increasing size and menacing potential. Some Western observers have tried to hint to readers that something "big and evil" is fast evolving in China.
It turns out that the killer jet is just a stealth fighter yet to complete its test flight. By comparison, the US military has put their own stealth fighters, the F22s, into active service for many years.
The behemoth "ship" is an aircraft carrier under construction, but it  hardly makes a splash because not only traditional military powers like the United States and Russia have aircraft carriers, but even lesser powers, such as Thailand and Argentina, have their own carriers as well.
As for cyber hackers, they could be a bunch of web-savvy young people anxious to show off their skills, who have nothing to do with the Chinese military.
Myths about China's military like this are not hard to find in the West and elsewhere. 
It underlines the fact that some countries are growing increasingly uneasy about China's military capabilities as the country, supported by a booming economy, has loomed larger and larger on the world stage.
To get a true overall picture of China's military, one needs to take a close look at real strategy and capabilities of the People's Liberation Army (PLA). Any attempt to mystify its real strength and intention can get one nowhere.
Chinese political and military leaders have availed themselves every opportunity to reiterate to outsiders China's unswerving commitment to "peaceful development." 
They do it so often that their remarks fall flat on some foreign ears, but the key message they try to get across has remained the same: China doesn't want war; China needs peace.
With more than 1.3 billion people to feed and tough internal challenges like the widening income gaps and great strains on energy and environment by rapid economic growth, 
China has little choice but to make the most of a largely peaceful environment and seek business opportunities rather than make enemies with other countries.
For example, according to one estimate, China has to create some 20 million jobs a year in the next 20 years to keep tens of millions of migrant workers and college graduates employed. That is roughly one-third of Britain's overall population.
Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie has recently said that the key to judging whether a country is a threat to world peace does not lie in the strength of its economy or military, but indeed the practical domestic and foreign policy it pursues.
Late last year, after a crucial meeting of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, Dai Bingguo, Chinese state councilor in charge of foreign policy, has expounded on several occasions China's strategy of peaceful development.
In a long and detailed article under the title of Commitment to Peaceful Development, Dai said China believes win-win cooperation with other countries, instead of expansionism or hegemony, serves its national interests better.
In his words, China's commitment to peaceful development "will not change in 100 or 1,000 years."
Despite all the hype about China's military strength, China's defense spending, in proportion to its gross domestic product (GDP), has remained fairly low, compared to the world's major developed countries.
China's military spending is some $80 billion in 2010, roughly 1.4 percent of its GDP, while that of the major countries is around 3 percent to 4 percent, the Chinese government figures show.
Many Western observers assume a much higher spending for China's military than official figures indicate, and some put the figure as much as some $150 billion. However, even that wild guess pales when compared with the staggering US figure of $729 billion.
In terms of real capabilities, China's military is still regional in nature rather than global.
In contrast with the United States, the world's uncontested sole military superpower, China lags far behind when it comes to global reach of military forces and the ability for their rapid deployment around the world.
PLA Chief of the General Staff Chen Bingde, in a recent US tour, said China's military strength is 20 years behind the United States.
For China, widespread myth about its military power underscores a need  to communicate more often and more effectively with other countries on the issue. 
The increasingly frequent overseas tours of its top military officials probably herald China's greater efforts for that end.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA  
Netcraft rank: 5924 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com Creative Commons License


Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Even the Cuban Commies are having hard times.



(Sept. 14) Cuba's communist leaders have already determined what soon-to-be-dismissed 500,000 workers should do after they get pink slips in sweeping government layoffs.

There is a a plan for them to raise rabbits, get jobs with foreign companies, paint buildings, and pilot ferries.

This should revitalize free enterprise in Cuba.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 8788  
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Monday, August 2, 2010

What Mao Zedong said about liberalism


Conservatives like to suggest that communism, socialism and liberalism are the same thing. According to Wikipedia:

Communism is a sociopolitical structure that aims for a classless and stateless society with the communal ownership of property.

Socialism is an economic and political theory based on public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, "of freedom" is the belief in the importance of liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, capitalism, free trade, and the separation of church and state.

Most social scientists consider communism to be a political system while socialism is an economic system. Capitalism is to fascism is what socialism is to communism. In the real world, most country's have mixed economic systems that have both elements of capitalism and socialism.

Of interest, liberal ideas actually developed before conservative ideas. 

Is liberalism like socialism and communism? The great Chinese leader, Mao Zedong, didn't think so. 


革命的集体组织中的自由主义是十分有害的。它是一种腐蚀剂,使团结涣散,关系松懈,工作消极,意见分歧。它使革命队伍失掉严密的组织和纪律,政策不能贯彻到底,党的组织和党所领导的群众发生隔离。这是一种严重的恶劣倾向。

Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads. It is an extremely bad tendency.Combat Liberalism" (7 September 1937), later quoted in Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong (The Little Red Book) (1964), Ch. 24.

. . . It (liberalism) robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads. It is an extremely bad tendency.

Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism.

People who are liberals look upon the principles of Marxism as abstract dogma. They approve of Marxism, but are not prepared to practice it or to practice it in full; they are not prepared to replace their liberalism by Marxism. 

These people have their Marxism, but they have their liberalism as well--they talk Marxism but practice liberalism; they apply Marxism to others but liberalism to themselves. They keep both kinds of goods in stock and find a use for each. This is how the minds of certain people work. Combat Liberalism, 1937

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 14896  
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Saturday, July 4, 2009

14 POINTS OF FASCISM

Editors'  Note: The right wing always get confused about what is fascist and what is socialist. Fascism is always nationalistic while socialism is international in scope. Fascism is on the right and socialism is on the left. Socialism is an economic theory whereas communism is political. 

In fascism the social classes are viewed as working cooperatively and corporations are viewed as integral private organizations. This cooperation among the classes is called syndicalism. In socialism, there is more emphasis on the government and public sectors. The government encourages a more equitable distribution of the national treasure.The 14 points of fascism follow:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights

The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause

The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism

Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism

Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media

Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

7. Obsession with national security

Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together

Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected

Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts

Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment


Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption

Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections

Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

NOTE: The above 14 Points was written in 2004 by Dr. Laurence Britt, a political scientist. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of: Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile).

Does any of this sound familiar? As America sinks deeper and deeper into corporate greed will this country continue to be a democracy by the people and for the people or will it be ruled by the few? Will the trinity of money, power and greed over come one of the greatest countries in the world? Only we, the people, can keep it free. SPEAK OUT AND LET YOUR THOUGHTS BE KNOWN...ONLY BY SILENCE WILL WE BE DEFEATED!

"What no one seemed to notice. . . was the ever widening gap. . .between the government and the people. . . And it became always wider. . . the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting, it provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway . . . (it) gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about . . .and kept us so busy with continuous changes and 'crises' and so fascinated . . . by the machinations of the 'national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. . .

Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, 'regretted,' that unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these 'little measures'. . . must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. . . .Each act. . . is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow.

You don't want to act, or even talk, alone. . . you don't want to 'go out of your way to make trouble.' . . .But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves, when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. . . .You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things your father. . . could never have imagined." :

From Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1938-45 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955)
 

Source: http://www.ellensplace.net/fascism.html

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Contact Rightardia: eelder1@gmail.com

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/blogspot/Onjs