Ignoring Communism’s Crimes Against Humanity

Posted by UncommonSense 10 years, 8 months ago to History
34 comments | Share | Flag

Did Pres. Reagan really defeat communism? Perhaps in Germany. But not here, and not anywhere else...the political/economic cancer had already been firmly entrenched by then. This article asks some great questions that no one on the Left have the guts to answer, but offer plenty of excuses.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by $ nickursis 10 years, 8 months ago
    I for one, do not believe that the "Marxist" Ideal, or any form of collectivism has ever been a valid social structure, any more that the Progressive ideas of redistribution are part of the basic American idea. It is, always has been, a system used to justify attacking one of the main principles that marks true freedom: doing violence on others in the form of taking away from one to give to the other (of their choice of course). One reason I like Objectivism is that it denys anyone that ability, and as such, is a direct enemy of any system that would do so. One reason I think most Conservatives are Objectivists at heart. Our history has also included "Crimes Against Humanity" in some form, the treatment of Native Americans, our participation in the 1920s in the Philippines. There has not, in my humble opinion, been a true Communist/Socialist system that has ever actually come into existence, just simulations claiming that heritage, which is why they will never answer for it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 10 years, 8 months ago
    Take another look at the quote from Alexander Trachtenberg. Chilling because it is underway.

    'We' have problems which include:
    There are several enemies, it is a mistake to lump them together, or to support one over the other, tactics may or may not be valid but the strategy of defeating both should never be forgotten.
    Words such as liberalism, progressivism, democracy, do not describe universally bad concepts, those words have been misapplied. Liberalism should mean open minded and tolerant, to be progressive should mean wanting improvement, voting can have a place even under anarchic libertarianism. Neither the arguments nor the definitions of enemies are to be accepted at face value. .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 10 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    What else could a Socialist state evolve to except a dictatorship? When their Utopian ideas fail, as Obama's have for the past six years with the electorate turning thumbs down, they must admit they are wrong, or, increase the use of force to get the people to understand the beauty of Marxism. Their credo; believe or die.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Given the direction of the world I sometimes wonder if the USSR had a long range plan during the fall of the Berlin wall to infect the West and pretend that Russia had changed, when it it is now run by the KGB.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 8 months ago
    But why does it somehow equate conservative free market principles with the National Socialist Party (Nazi's) ?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 8 months ago
    Khrushchev is laughing in his grave, "We will bury you!"
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo