Can Donald Trump become President Again?

[Foxi4]

If they're heisting my tax dollars from government, and they very frequently are, then they do owe me something. Corporations would never in a million years be able to repay all the taxes they've illegally avoided, let alone all the handouts given to them by the politicians they've bought.

Objectively speaking, it’s their own tax dollars, just by sheer volume, but that’s a different discussion.

 

[tabzer]

Capitalism is a behavior defined after the fact. You can't snuff it out. It even exists in prison.

These people... If the government makes a "good" policy in regulating the market, it's called socialism. If they make a "bad" decision, blame capitalism. Lol.

 

[Xzi]

Capitalism is just a tool.

Capitalism is an economic system, you aren't telling me anything I didn't already know. The whole crux of the argument is that I don't believe economic systems can be held responsible for the actions of individual imperialists, authoritarians, oligarchs, and dictators. Do I believe capitalism enables amoral individuals to rise to those positions more easily? Yes. Subtle but important distinction.

Objectively speaking, it’s their own tax dollars, just by sheer volume, but that’s a different discussion.

It doesn't matter what the total they've paid in taxes is if they aren't paying their share as mandated by law. The rest of us common folk are permitted to do nothing less.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

No, you're putting words in my mouth, which is typical behavior of a liberal.

No, you're moving the goalposts and gaslighting, which is typical behaviour of abusive reactionary traitors.

You do realize that American's enemies want to force us to adopt communism through socialism because they want to see us destroyed, right? You're being played.

Oh, boy, America needs socialism so bad. Just like in Northern Europe (not UK), the happiest societies of the world. not the clusterfuck the USA are, where abortion rights are being rolled back by a cabal of fanatics you support as a way to actively control women. Or where people died of Covid because they couldn't afford to see a doctor. Seriously, is this the society you think it's worth preserving? Because if you think so, you're mad.

Your obsession with "communism" is concerning, since you're a Putinist stooge anyway. Communism is dead across the planet, and rightfully so as it obviously failed. Socialism is a very different beast, and one every society should adopt. Disaster capitalism, which both USA and UK clearly represent, needs to be wiped out. It's not like USA doesn't have some socialist policies anyway: what do you think firefighters are, genius? Public transport? road maintenance?

Re world wars. Are we ignoring the socialist part (and they were) of national socialist for at least round two? The history of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and earlier rearmaments is also a fun one in this.
As far as 1 being a right wing affair... that is a drastic oversimplification but I don't know how much time we have for that one.

No, it's you trying to whitewash an ascertained historical fact for your vile political ends, you Denialist you. Williamson coming to mind!

How is it white washing? It’s a 100 million dead people, from all factors (war/conflict, ethnic cleansing and European diseases). It’s actually at the high end of estimates - there are lower numbers floating about. If anything, I’m being generous. As far as Marx is concerned, yes - I do blame him. He created the abjectly amoral framework that all those those oppressive regimes based their own system on, he’s one of the catalysts of collectivist thought. In the absence of Marx, none of them would ever be established. I wonder how the world would’ve looked like then - an interesting thought.

And again, you're talking nonsense - and frankly, it's amazing at the amount of misdirection you're playing.

Blaming Marx but not Nietzsche or any other political author. OK, more intellectual dishonesty here.
There is nothing amoral about Marx, as you'd know if you had actually read ANYTHING written by him, and not the bits misquoted and lied upon by reactionary propaganda. In fact, it's scary how spot-on he was, even more than two centuries later. Same thing can't be said about Nietszche, for one.

Man i cant wait to see your reacting in the midterms im sure Joe will do fine with his approval rating been lower than trump

I've already noticed the ridiculous amount of gerrymandering that happened, so it's safe to say that America can't be counted as a democracy in any meaningful way. Also, you're wrong - Biden's approval is (sligthly) higher than Trump in the same year. Then again, no-one ever accused Americans of being meaningful thinkers in any way.

 

[tabzer]

No, you're moving the goalposts and gaslighting, which is typical behaviour of abusive reactionary traitors

Dude was talking about diluted forms typically used for other sterilization purposes, not rocket fuel. Let it go.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Dude was talking about diluted forms typically used for other sterilization purposes, not rocket fuel. Let it go.

Not the point, which you obviously missed.

 

[Foxi4]

And again, you're talking nonsense - and frankly, it's amazing at the amount of misdirection you're playing.

That’s not a rebuttal. Do you have a different figure to offer, or just the pearls that you’re clutching over there? What exactly is the objection? Which part is false, or white washing? I *just* said that colonisation led to the death of 90% of the indigenous population, either directly or indirectly, over the course of 500 years. Which part of that statement is inconsistent with historical record?

Blaming Marx but not Nietzsche or any other political author. OK, more intellectual dishonesty here.

There is nothing amoral about Marx, as you'd know if you had actually read ANYTHING written by him, and not the bits misquoted and lied upon by reactionary propaganda. In fact, it's scary how spot-on he was, even more than two centuries later. Same thing can't be said about Nietszche, for one.

The core precepts of communism, as outlined in Marx’s Communist Manifesto (which he co-authored with Engels), are amoral.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

The core precepts of communism, as outlined in Marx’s Communist Manifesto (which he co-authored with Engels), are amoral.

It's hilarious to hear a libertarian talk about something being amoral when your basic tenets ditch morality altogether.

Let's go with a brief synthesis of the most basic of Marxist principles (https://libcom.org/article/basic-principles-marxism-critique-sociale):

"Opposition to an economic system based on inequality and on the alienation and exploitation of the majority (by means of the system of wage labor), a system whose purpose is to obtain profits for some people rather than satisfying the needs of all."

The only amoral thing I see here is the situation described, not opposing it.

I *just* said that colonisation led to the death of 90% of the indigenous population, either directly or indirectly, over the course of 500 years. Which part of that statement is inconsistent with historical record?

Did you forget that colonial powers were NOT communist? Or are you saying the British empire was some sort of commie dictatorship?

 

[Foxi4]

It's hilarious to hear a libertarian talk about something being amoral when your basic tenets ditch morality altogether.

Let's go with a brief synthesis of the most basic of Marxist principles (https://libcom.org/article/basic-principles-marxism-critique-sociale):

"Opposition to an economic system based on inequality and on the alienation and exploitation of the majority (by means of the system of wage labor), a system whose purpose is to obtain profits for some people rather than satisfying the needs of all."

The only amoral thing I see here is the situation described, not opposing it.

I’m not going to walk you through the piece point by point - you can read it yourself. If you dislike the term “amoral”, “immoral” is also applicable. In fact, portions of it are also self-contradictory.

Did you forget that colonial powers were NOT communist? Or are you saying the British empire was some sort of commie dictatorship?

…are you arguing with yourself again? What are you on about? Nobody said that.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

I’m not going to walk you through the piece point by point - you can read it yourself. If you dislike the term “amoral”, “immoral” is also applicable. In fact, portions of it are also self-contradictory.…are you arguing with yourself again? What are you on about? Nobody said that.

I did read those, and before this conversation, and "immoral" is even more ludicrous. Hence why you're talking nonsense.

And no, I'm not arguing with myself. Just highlighting how your claim that "communist dictatorships were the worst thing on earth" is completely bonkers.

 

[tabzer]

Not the point, which you obviously missed.

I noticed both the strawman and fake outrage. It looks pathetic.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

I noticed both the strawman and fake outrage. It looks pathetic.

And I notice someone who hasn't understood anything as nature has left him desperately lacking, and yet is desperate to participate. It looks sad, you'd consider retiring.

 

[Foxi4]

I did read those, and before this conversation, and "immoral" is even more ludicrous. Hence why you're talking nonsense.

And no, I'm not arguing with myself. Just highlighting how your claim that "communist dictatorships were the worst thing on earth" is completely bonkers.

Confiscation of property without compensation is immoral. Violent revolution (which entails the systematic murder of the “oppressing classes”) is immoral. Replacing an elected state with unelected revolutionaries is immoral. We could go on all day.

I don’t know how you’ve reached this bizarre conclusion regarding colonisation, but that’s not what the argument is about - nobody has ever said, at any point, that colonisation of the Americas had anything to do with communism. We were comparing death tolls. How you reached your conclusion from that is a mystery.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Confiscation of property without compensation is immoral. Violent revolution (which entails the systematic murder of the “oppressing classes”) is immoral. Replacing an elected state with unelected revolutionaries is immoral. We could go on all day.

You ARE aware that, in Marx's own words, these things are not a given, aren't you? Despite his materialistic perspective, Marx didn't necessarily think that violence was the only answer. But considering that he lived and wrote in the 19th century, a century marked by Napoleonic wars AND the 1848 revolutions, together with the peak and subsequent fall of slavery, ll this inevitably left a mark on the man. Who knows, perhaps if those reactionary imperialist powers hadn't acted so brutal, things would have been different.

How you reached your conclusion from that is a mystery

You can blame yourself and your ridiculous assertions for it.

I suppose we can all agree that world war 2 was much worse than every communist dictatorship together, and since you like sources: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll

If we go by the geometric column, WW2 is at 77 million deaths (in its ridiculously short duration) while every single communist dictatorship over 104 years (and in case you need to be told, it's 1917-present day) a "mere" 64 million.

Personally, I think that death toll is only one parameter to consider, but somehow you think it's the only one so I decided to rely on that.

 

[Deleted member 559230]

Oh, boy, America needs socialism so bad. Just like in Northern Europe (not UK), the happiest societies of the world. not the clusterfuck the USA are, where abortion rights are being rolled back by a cabal of fanatics you support as a way to actively control women. Or where people died of Covid because they couldn't afford to see a doctor. Seriously, is this the society you think it's worth preserving? Because if you think so, you're mad.

Your obsession with "communism" is concerning, since you're a Putinist stooge anyway. Communism is dead across the planet, and rightfully so as it obviously failed. Socialism is a very different beast, and one every society should adopt. Disaster capitalism, which both USA and UK clearly represent, needs to be wiped out. It's not like USA doesn't have some socialist policies anyway: what do you think firefighters are, genius? Public transport? road maintenance?

I don't like Putin or Russia and its good that we're outlawing the killing of unborn life. As for your views that somehow socialism will solve problems ... like I already stated, that's what our enemies, like Russia, want you to believe.

No, you're moving the goalposts and gaslighting, which is typical behaviour of abusive reactionary traitors.

You're sure mastering the Liberal buzzwords, however they are empty and without substance. You're simply wrong. Get over it.

 

[Foxi4]

You ARE aware that, in Marx's own words, these things are not a given, aren't you? Despite his materialistic perspective, Marx didn't necessarily think that violence was the only answer. But considering that he lived and wrote in the 19th century, a century marked by Napoleonic wars AND the 1848 revolutions, together with the peak and subsequent fall of slavery, ll this inevitably left a mark on the man. Who knows, perhaps if those reactionary imperialist powers hadn't acted so brutal, things would have been different.

There is no possible scenario in which the precepts of the communist manifesto could be enacted peacefully.

You can blame yourself and your ridiculous assertions for it.

Everything I said was correct. You misunderstood the exchange I had with Xzi and then said something nonsensical that nobody mentioned before.

I suppose we can all agree that world war 2 was much worse than every communist dictatorship together, and since you like sources: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll

If we go by the geometric column, WW2 is at 77 million deaths (in its ridiculously short duration) while every single communist dictatorship over 104 years (and in case you need to be told, it's 1917-present day) a "mere" 64 million.

Personally, I think that death toll is only one parameter to consider, but somehow you think it's the only one so I decided to rely on that.

Not a “mere” 64 million. I disagree with your low estimate. The Great Leap Forward accounts for 30 million dead from starvation alone (estimates range between 15 and 55 million), making “The Three Years of Great Famine” the worst period of famine in recorded history. Your figure does not pass the sniff test.

We also can’t “agree” regarding WWII’s effects. We haven’t even established that they’re separate - they’re not, communist forces participated in the conflict and contributed to that figure. In fact, a large number of communist massacres occurred *during* WWII or in its immediate aftermath, so those two figures intersect - you’re counting dead bodies twice. More importantly, you’re attacking a point that was never made - in addition to loss of human life, WWII had a variety of consequences, including environmental ones, which isn’t what we’re discussing. We were discussing the death toll, and the death toll of communism ranges between 60 million on the low ball and 150 million on the high end. In the spirit of fairness I’m picking average figures for all of those events, and communism still comes out on top, by a significant margin. The accepted and commonly quoted number is 100 million, so that’s what I chose.

I don’t know what point you’re trying to make, and I’m not going to hazard a guess. Maybe once you elaborate on what you’re trying to say things will become a bit clearer. Better yet, you can refrain from beating a dead horse and move on with the discussion since this part has pretty much concluded, unless you have a closing statement of some kind?

 

[Dark_Ansem]

I don't like Putin or Russia and its good that we're outlawing the killing of unborn life. As for your views that somehow socialism will solve problems ... like I already stated, that's what our enemies, like Russia, want you to believe.

Russia is as much socialist as I am king of England. So either whip up my crown or STFU. Russia is the epitome of a disaster capitalist society - currently even more than America. And unborn life can't be killed, because it's not life. But I appreciate your misogyny showing, and your loser nature shining through these disgusting attempts to punish women for enjoying sex.

You're sure mastering the Liberal buzzwords, however they are empty and without substance. You're simply wrong. Get over it.

I can play this game too, MTG of gba. You're full of nonsense and are a liar and a cheat.

There is no possible scenario in which the precepts of the communist manifesto could be enacted peacefully.

Wrong again. Has happened and is happening in plenty of places.

Not a “mere” 64 million. I disagree with your low estimate. The Great Leap Forward accounts for 30 million dead from starvation alone (estimates range between 15 and 55 million), making “The Three Years of Great Famine” the worst period of famine in recorded history. Your figure does not pass the sniff test.

Not "my estimate", and that you disagree with it is inconsequential, as that's what we have. As you repeatedly said throughout these 30+ pages, it's only the data that matters. I disagree with your higher estimate.

In fact, a large number of communist massacres occurred *during* WWII or in its immediate aftermath, so those two figures intersect - you’re counting dead bodies twice.

No, I'm not.

they’re not, communist forces participated in the conflict and contributed to that figure

As did non-communist ones. There, see?

More importantly, you’re attacking a point that was never made - in addition to loss of human life, WWII had a variety of consequences, including environmental ones, which isn’t what we’re discussing

I was discussing them, in fact I introduced them to the discourse, but you decided to ignore them because they wouldn't fit your libertarian narrative.

I don’t know what point you’re trying to make, and I’m not going to hazard a guess. Maybe once you elaborate on what you’re trying to say things will become a bit clearer.

I've already stated it plenty of time, doesn't matter how much you and circlejerk of putinist stooges disagrees.

 

[Deleted member 559230]

Russia is as much socialist as I am king of England. So either whip up my crown or STFU. Russia is the epitome of a disaster capitalist society - currently even more than America. And unborn life can't be killed, because it's not life. But I appreciate your misogyny showing, and your loser nature shining through these disgusting attempts to punish women for enjoying sex.

I can play this game too, MTG of gba. You're full of nonsense and are a liar and a cheat.

I never stated that Russia was under socialism. I stated I dislike Putin and Russia and that Russia is our enemy and one that has helped brainwash you into thinking that adopting socialism is the right thing to do. As for you, who seems to like to only insult others and talks about things no one uttered or said you're going on ignore. I don't need your kind of influence in my life. Bye.

 

[Foxi4]

Wrong again. Has happened and is happening in plenty of places.

Name them. I can’t address a rebuttal that consists of “no, you’re wrong”. There are very few communist states that were implemented in history and I can’t think of any that were established without direct bloodshed or not in the immediate aftermath of an unrelated revolution (if a foreign power or another revolution has already dismantled the state then there’s a possibility that communism can fill in the vacuum, but that’s an obvious special circumstance). Certainly not long-lasting ones, but I’ll wait for examples.

Not "my estimate", and that you disagree with it is inconsequential, as that's what we have. As you repeatedly said throughout these 50+ pages, it's only the data that matters. I disagree with your higher estimate.

Then you disagree with the majority of scholars and we can end the discussion here. The commonly quoted and generally agreed upon figure is 100 million - some say it’s lower, some say it’s higher. This is the safe average.

No, I'm not.

I have no response. You haven’t addressed the argument.

As did non-communist ones. There, see?

See what? Make an argument. I can’t guess what you’re thinking.

I was discussing them, in fact I introduced them to the discourse, but you decided to ignore them because they wouldn't fit your libertarian narrative.

I generally ignore irrelevant information, yes. If it’s not something that we were discussing, it can be dismissed. The point that was being contested was the death toll.

I've already stated it plenty of time, doesn't matter how much you and circlejerk of putinist stooges disagrees.

You’re right, it doesn’t matter. I’m just giving you an opportunity to clarify what otherwise doesn’t make any sense.

 

[Deleted member 559230]

Dude was talking about diluted forms typically used for other sterilization purposes, not rocket fuel. Let it go.

Thank you for backing me up. What I was talking about was the fact that Trump suggested it might be possible to inject disinfectants to help fight COVID19. While I'm not sure why he suggested it might be possible he never specifically stated which disinfectant or disinfectants he was referring to. So the dumb liberals claim he meant bleach and some say he said to drink bleach while others claim he said to inject bleach. However, bleach was never mentioned. So I went on to give a link to a list of common disinfectants that Trump might have been referring to and then mentioned that hydrogen peroxide, which is on the list, can be used as a disinfectant. Then @Dark_Ansem stated that hydrogen peroxide will harm you and I replied with links to commercially available products such as toothpaste and mouth wash that contain hydrogen peroxide. After that Dark_Ansem claimed all sorts of stupid shit to try to avoid having to admit he was wrong. Anyway, thanks again!