‘Scratch a Liberal and You Will Find a Fascist Every Time’: Hollywood Icon James Woods Opens Up Abou

The Inconvenient Truth: Lenin's "New Economic Policy (NEP)" was intended to encouraged capitalism.
So far, nothing you have posted contradicts that well documented fact.

"Among the first to describe the Russian economy under the Bolshevik government as “state capitalism”, was Lenin himself in 1918. By this term he meant state control of capitalist-owned industries. He had been impressed by the system of industrial control which the German government had built up during the war. If the Kaiser and the Prussian Junkers could control capitalist industry for their purposes why, thought Lenin, could not the Bolshevik Party control capitalist industry for the benefit of the workers and poor peasants of Russia?"

"The civil war and foreign intervention forced the Bolsheviks to take a number of emergency measures — like nationalising factories whose owners had fled, requisitioning grain from the peasants, causing inflation by an over-issue of paper currency. Some Bolsheviks regarded these as measures to set up a moneyless economy in Russia, but this was absurd. As soon as the Civil War was over in 1921 they were abandoned and Lenin again advocated a policy of state capitalism. The New Economic Policy (NEP), introduced that year, was described as a policy of developing capitalism in Russia under the control of the Bolshevik government."
WORLDSOCIALISM.ORG, STATE CAPITALISM FOR RUSSIA, Lenin’s economic policy,
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb...70/no-788-april-1970/state-capitalism-russia/

Worked for the Kaiser, Ditto, Lenin, Xi ...

State Capitalism, capitalist owned businesses subject to the direction of the state, is compatible with Communist and Fascist totalitarianism -- and the USA.
See Twitter, Facebook, Google et al operating under the direction of the FBI/DOJ/DNI etc.

 

Lenin was a Marxist, not a capitalist. There's no reason to believe he was intending to maintain capitallism.

State capitalism is not capitalism. It's simply a way of organizing a collectivist economy.

Lenin had no sense of how a capitalist economy allocates capital. No surprise given how revolutionary socialists think.

There's no capitalism without capital moving freely in capital markets (stocks, bonds, etc.).

I would caution you not to put too many eggs in the Socialist Party of Great Britain as a source.

The U.S. never thought so and didn't recognize the Soviet Union for more than a decade.

This is half-baked nonsense.

 

I Double Dog Dare you to find a quote from my posts stating that Lenin "was intending to maintain capitallism".

 

I don't need to ask myself any of the silly questions you pose, because I've known the answer to those questions for many long years.

You seem to be the sort of poster that concentrates on personalities instead of ideas. You either do not comprehend what the Twitter revelations mean, or you prefer to remain ignorant about it. Elon is behaving in a patriotic way, revealing the crimes of government AND industry for all to see. He is imitating Julian Assange in that regard.

Truth does not mind being questioned, and a lie does not like being challenged.

You don't seem to realize what J. Edgar Hoover was talking about when he noted "The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."

 

Exactly. That's why he didn't respond. His nonsense won't survive scrutiny.

 

There are two situations with "private" property. One is a business that's open to the general public, and the other is truly private property. Someone's home, for example.

A store putting up a sign that says "no firearms" is no different than a store putting up a sign that says "no homosexuals". You don't get to pick and choose whose rights you infringe when you are open to the public by nature of your operation. The only exception to which is if your actions are somehow impacting the operations of the store or other customers in some definable way. Openly carrying a rifle or walking around with assless chaps on, for example, might get you asked to leave, at which point you comply or get trespassed.

On the other hand, I never enter another person's home or private property without letting them know I'm armed and asking them if that's ok. I won't violate their rights on their property.....because they're not open to the general public.

Twitter wasn't following a policy. It was targeting a specific group of people to take action against. It was a de facto branch of the democrat party doing whatever the government told them to do. There's no difference between the government infringing on your rights and the government using a private entity to do so. Both are equally criminal.

 

Sailed right over your head, did it?

I will continue to point out that Lenin was a revolutionary Marxist who fully intended to collectivize production and someone capitalists correctly saw as an existential threat.

 

Duh!

 

You do realize you proved my point without even realizing it.

Second, the questions I asked goes into the reasons why Musk is doing what he is doing. The questions were not intended to exemplify private property rights, but as to why the business is hemorrhaging on all fronts. What you need to forget for a few moments before you answer those questions is truth, freedom of speech, and business concepts. For instance, the firing of over half of the employees was never about "woke" idealogy. If you believe that, you have no idea what is really going on with Twitter here. The reason why they were fired had everything to do with finances, but Musk really can't say that publicly because that will negate any future hope of private investors he is courting. But also what he is doing is making private investors, even conservative investors, very nervous because they rely on the financials and projected financials. All the rest is just a distraction for people like you, to get you in fodder to keep coming to Twitter and stroke Musk's ego.

As for your quote, he was referring to communism and the Big Red Scare in which most Americans were oblivious to what Communism is. So yeah, I know what he was talking about. But you have to look at context here too. He made that quote in his book Masters of Deceit, which was written in 1958 and tells how communism in America originated and why it should be eliminated from these shores. This was the McCarthy era and its remenants with the UnAmerican Activities that prety much turned lives upside down all on hearsay.

 

Okay, how is it different from "no firearms" and "no homosexuals" or "blacks" or Democrats or any other group? I don't see the difference here. But the point was that the same conservatives in texas who touted that private property should decide to allow firearms or not are also the same ones who are trying to get the same company to change that policy through various tactics. In Texas, they are even trying to allow people with firearms in bars. And we all know that alcohol and guns really do not mix, do they.

With homes, they are not a business, are they? You can ask someone to leave, but what you cannot do is shoot someone on your property without any warning, can you? And yet, some conservatives think a person can do "whatever they want" on their property without any repercussions.

As far as Twitter, they had Terms of Service, but they were never targeting anyone from the email exchanges I have seen. Yes, it has been reported that way by conservative media, who are stretching the facts to meet the political agenda that everyone is against them conspiracy theory garbage.

 

Yes, and Lenin wasn't a fascist, and Hitler wasn't a socialist.

 

Depends on the people in the bar. There are states that allow you to carry firearms into bars that don't have a high homicide rate at all.

Some leftists are pedophiles too. Does that make you one?

LoL the DNC had a direct line to take down posters from Twitter. You clearly need to read something other than the people you allow to think for you.

Try the actual reporting directly from the folks on Twitter. Weiss is a card carrying leftist and she's one of them reporting on it. The media you read has been controlled by the DNC longer than Twitter has. Of course you won't see it there. Legacy media is the only censorship they have left.

 

It can be argued that Lenin's policy of encouraging state capitalism amounted to Fascism. It is a good argument, but not entirely persuasive,.
Virtually all of the Bolshevik revolutionaries who managed to live long enough were eventually convicted of being fascists. You know that -- right?

The NSDAP was "socialist" enough to attract a large number of trade unionist Socialist voters to join Hitler's Nazi Party.

 

Throughout Lenin's entire reign, the Bolsheviks were consolidating power. I think his approach to economic control and economic output was a temporary concession to the capitalists.

By Soviet courts? By Marxist-Leninists who can't explain how other Marxist-Leninists could be responsible for a police state? Stalinists must have been fascists.

The Nazis weren't socialists. How, who and why they attracted trade unionists has a lot to do with the Depression.

 

Never do the guilty-by-association thing. Second, alcohol and firearms generally do not mix. What you are saying is more of an outlier than anything else. And the perspective of guns at bars is never inside the bar, it is always outside. And what usually happens is you go to the bar to have a few drinks, have an argument with someone because they are either drunk or tipsy, the bouncers throw you out, you continue the argument outside the bar, and then someone gets the bright idea of using a firearm to solve that argument. It is why it is always prudent, even the NRA will agree with this, not to bring a firearm into a bar under any circumstances. And the reason, once you start drinking, your thinking facilities dissipate and you go more on ego than anything else.

People who are pedophiles are that way because of choice, not political idealogy. Some righties are pedophiles, and some righties encourage pedophilia, but isn't that the person's choice to be that way and not political idealogy?

Finally, the DNC did not have a direct line. The evidence is that Twitter listened to both sides and made the facts based on both sides. And yes, the Trump administration was making calls to Twitter not to get people banned like MTG, Keyne West, and others. They did it privately and mostly by Meadows, Kuschner, and others. But in the end, Twitter made its own decisions based on the facts presented to them. They are not bound to do what the WH tells them to do, nor anyone else. This is just another conservative conspiracy theory much like the election conspiracy theory and so forth.

Legacy media is what all national media does. If you ever watch Fox News, despite being "fair and balanced" they never give any credit to the other side and just provide a conservative viewpoint. It is why they focus so much on opinion programming and not news at all. And that opinion is not going to include any other points of view in any serious context. And yes, they are telling you what to hear, what to read, and to only consider their perspective. So, they just as guilty of "censorship" when they intentionally exclude other points of view, don't they?