How to be WrOnG ... BETTER

You did no such thing, you make think you did ,but you have the right to be in error. Your fanciful diatribe of opinions reads like a Salon opinion piece. But you can imagine you "proved" whatever you can fancy.

 

lol...isn’t that trump’s go to dodge when he has a brain fart that gets shot down and he has to save face?
Some kids do fall for it every time.

 

No critique again. Lets go through it. Did Nazi Germany allow capitalism, but with centralised dictates? Yes! See, for example, Buchheim and Scherner (2007, The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry, Journal of Economic History, 66: 390-416). Did I provide examples of Trump celebrating capitalism but under his centralised dictates? Why yes, I did

 

Trump tweeted it so it MUST be accurate

 

Lol the right uses God to try to shape policies and dictate what we can and cant do when in fact if there is a God he certainly wouldn't follow with them and some of their racist me first attitudes
Since the right choose trump and protects his authoritarian leadership that is the way the party is heading a bunch of fascists...

 

Marxist theory put into practice in what Country with rewarding effect.?
Not the Soviet Empire.Reagan saw to that.
" Any critical examination of Marxist theory is forbidden,doubts of it's
correctness are punished in the same way as heresy was once
punished in the Catholic church { The Inquisition } " -- Sigmund Freud

 

Marxist theory refers to evolution. As I said, like Schumpeter, Marx referred to the 'colossal' success of capitalism. Like Schumpeter, its about an evolutionary process towards socialism. The contradictions of capitalism, mind you, leads to qualitative focus on how revolutionary pressures can develop.

Its simply not possible to understand capitalism today without reference to Marxism. Look at the state of the orthodox approaches and their need to steal from Marxist concepts. The Chicago School, for example, had to wrongly assume that racism can be understood within preferences (and a 'taste for discrimination'). Neo-Keynesians, in contrast, decided to give up on understanding unemployment (using instead an empirical 'Phillips Curve' relationship). When that failed, back we went to Marxism for an answer to mass unemployment and economic crisis.

 

You obviously haven't a clue as to what Fascism is and what
Antifa is up to.

Democracy + Private Ownership = Capitalism
Dictatorship + Private Ownership = Fascism

Mussolini was a practicing Fascist.

" Know then,once for all.that Fascism recognizes no Idols,
worships no fetishes.It has already passed over the more of
less decayed body of the Goddess of Liberty,and is quite prepared,
if necessary,to do so once more. " -- Benito Mussolini

The hallmark of Americanism is Life,LIBERTY and the pursuit
of Happiness.Learn it and then live it.
That is what Donald Trump is all about.
Or dint you git the memo.

 

" Despite his atheism,Marx cannot be understood without the Bible.
His myth of a perfect society,surmounting history,beyond history,
is in fact the Biblical myth of Paradise on Earth .... what is Marxism
if not Messianism ? " -- Eugene Ionesco { Romanian-born French writer }

 

Capitalism is The only Rational and Sane fit for those Americans
who believe in equality and fair-mindedness.Plus demonstrate a
conscience.
Today's Progressives are what John Birch warned about.
Virtual wolf in sheep's clothing.
Should be trusted about as far as 2 bits { a quarter } can buy lunch.

 

You're not even attempting to respond to what is said are you? Try again and this time either agree or disagree:

Marxist theory refers to evolution. As I said, like Schumpeter, Marx referred to the 'colossal' success of capitalism. Like Schumpeter, its about an evolutionary process towards socialism. The contradictions of capitalism, mind you, leads to qualitative focus on how revolutionary pressures can develop.

Its simply not possible to understand capitalism today without reference to Marxism. Look at the state of the orthodox approaches and their need to steal from Marxist concepts. The Chicago School, for example, had to wrongly assume that racism can be understood within preferences (and a 'taste for discrimination'). Neo-Keynesians, in contrast, decided to give up on understanding unemployment (using instead an empirical 'Phillips Curve' relationship). When that failed, back we went to Marxism for an answer to mass unemployment and economic crisis.

 

You can spiel till the cows come home.Doesn't mean squat.
You are unintelligible.Yer basically making up crap.
That is basically what Marxism attempts to accomplish.

{ The End of Laissez-Faire } 1925
" Marxian Socialism must always remain a portend to the
historians of opinion -- how a doctrine so illogical and so
dull can have exercised so powerful and enduring an influence
on the minds of men,and,throught them,the events of history."
-- John Maynard Keynes

 

Still no content and no attempt to reply to what I said. Its as if you can't. Amusing to see you refer to Keynes. He repeatedly referred to himself as a socialist

 

I discussed Stalin to respond to your post: "Hitler started WW2. Stalin attempted to buy time to make up for his stupidity." Reiver

The USSR and Nazi Germany formed an alliance to conquer and absorb nations.
They had a lot in common.

"Between his assumption of power in 1933 and the Soviet-Nazi Pact of 1939, Germany and the Soviet Union were, or pretended to be, on the worst of possible terms. They assailed each other with abusive material stressing the ideological incompatibility of Communism and National Socialism, while studiously ignoring the obvious similarities between the two systems...." Ronald Hingley, "Joseph Stalin" p. 292.

 

Keynes was certainly right about Marxism. Marx and Engles misinterpreted the French Revolution. That really was a very stupid thing for "revolutionaries" to do.
The lessons were right in their face.

 

Most human governments are at least remotely fascist.
The USA is inherently anti-fascist, but the bias against Big Bad Government has eroded since the start of the "progressive" era. But it is still a free country.
Americans are even free to burn down their own cities if they really want to.

 

All irrelevant to what I've said. You seem to want to talk about something else. Go ahead. Just find someone interested first

 

What exactly did you want to talk about.Oh yeah,how right you are
about everything w/o explaining anything.It's like discussing Sports with
a beer drunk who ran out of small change.Their mind is only on Beer
and that means beer money.
You are miserable at this message Board posting.
If this was a Formal College debate you would have to
reply to what your opponent just proved { via quotes }
or at least acknowledge.Acting belligerent as if you didn't hear
what another says would disqualify you from any formal Debate.
Or in the least you'd be cut off.

 

I merely expect critique of my argument. It did amuse me, mind you, that you referred to Keynes. An interventionist more akin to the Dems, he also has an underplayed history of pro-socialist comment. There's always humour in right wing comment.

 

No ... Mind You and yer abject lack of debating manners.

 

More spam! Please respond to what has been said. Did you not know of Keynes' socialist colours and did you not think that his output, which encourages substantial government interventionist policy, is alien to your belief structure?

 

Away I say.Away with you and yer moldy theories.
What IS ... is.You can't influence " what Is " by merely inserting
What should be.
Like the Future's Not ours to see.
Que Sera,Sera { Whatever Will Be,Will be }

 

And again! Clearly you haven't got the means to respond to anything actually said! It still amuses me to see you refer to Keynes, given his left wing position. Reminds me of when right wingers refer to Orwell, not knowing that he was an anarchist and socialist.

 

Why do so many people forget: