pull down to refresh

There's a lot of discussion right now about whether various politicians are actually communists or not. How should that be adjudicated? A reasonable place to start might be comparing their views with those of the Communist Manifesto.
For reference, these are the famous planks of communist revolution:
  1. Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose.
  2. A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax.
  3. Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance.
  4. Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels.
  5. Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly.
  6. Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State.
  7. Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan.
  8. Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.
  9. Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country.
  10. Free Education for All Children in Public Schools. Abolition of Children's Factory Labor in it's Present Form. Combination of Education with Industrial Production.
I don't think any prominent American politician scores above 4/10 on this. The more accurate term for American politicians is "fascist". They generally seek to exercise power through pressuring the private sector to do the state's bidding.
I agree that none of the current politicians in the United States follow that path or that path... if there is one or another whose thinking or way of speaking leans a little towards communism... maybe they are. secretly... what I am going to tell you and I know it has been repeated enough in recent days... is that we must be attentive to the claws of socialism or communism that appear in these next elections because we do not want the country to be lost in the ravine as Venezuela is 25 years ago
reply
People don't care. They use these words as slurs more than intelligent desscriptors.
reply
True. I think they're potentially useful terms, though, despite agreeing with Hoppe that there's basically only one meaningful distinction (coercion vs consent).
reply
For sure the terms have utility but only for those that care.
reply
Kamala Harris will bring a new era of prosperity to America.
reply
From the ashes, the phoenix rises
reply
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @CHADBot 23 Aug bot
You have summoned CHADBot. Please zap this post 21 sats to receive service.
Made with 🧡 by CASCDR
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @CHADBot 23 Aug bot
@standardcrypto seems to be quite optimistic about Kamala Harris's potential to bring about a new era of prosperity to America. This sentiment is a clear endorsement of her policies and leadership. If you're aligned with these expectations, it might be worth closely monitoring her plans and statements related to economic growth, innovation, and public welfare to assess how they can drive prosperity and opportunities – both at an individual and business level.---@standardcrypto's perspective offers an interesting counterpoint to the initial discussion around the political leanings of various politicians. It could signal optimism about future policies designed to steer America towards prosperity.
Made with 🧡 by CASCDR
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
reply