US vs Communism can US succeed today as it did against USSR??

Earl said:
CIA World Factbook:

USA-type of government-onstitutional federal republic
Click to expand...

That is a type of liberal democracy:

"Liberal democracy is a liberal political ideology and a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of classical liberalism. Also referred to as Western democracy, it is characterised by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified, (such as in the United States of America[1]), or uncodified, (such as in the United Kingdom) to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world.

A liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms as it may be a constitutional monarchy (such as Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom) or a republic (such as France, Germany, Poland, India, Italy, Ireland, Mexico, and the United States). It may have a parliamentary system (such as Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Israel, Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom), a presidential system (such as Indonesia and the United States) or a semi-presidential system (such as France, Poland and Romania).

Liberal democracies usually have universal suffrage, granting all adult citizens the right to vote regardless of ethnicity, sex, property ownership, race, age, sexuality, gender, income, social status, religion, etc. However, historically some countries regarded as liberal democracies have had a more limited franchise (for example in the UK and most US states some ex-convicts are unable to vote, a policy which was ruled a human rights violation by the European Court of Human Rights) and some do not have secret ballots. There may also be qualifications such as voters being required to register before being allowed to vote. The decisions made through elections are made not by all of the citizens but rather by those who are members of the electorate and who choose to participate by voting.

The liberal democratic constitution defines the democratic character of the state. The purpose of a constitution is often seen as a limit on the authority of the government. Liberal democracy emphasises the separation of powers, an independent judiciary and a system of checks and balances between branches of government. Liberal democracies are likely to emphasise the importance of the state being a Rechtsstaat, i.e. a state that follows the principle of rule of law. Governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedure. Many democracies use federalism—also known as vertical separation of powers—in order to prevent abuse and increase public input by dividing governing powers between municipal, provincial and national governments (e.g. Germany, where the federal government assumes the main legislative responsibilities and the federated Länder assume many executive tasks)."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy
 
Cypress said:
The Soviet Union dissolved on the watch of Poppy Bush, 3 years after Bedtime for Bonzo left office.

The Soviet Union dissolved because of nationalism and internal weaknesses which had nothing to do with anything a Hollywood B actor did.

The Russians survived a Nazi invasion , blockades, civil wars, starvation, deprivation in the face of enemy threats. Reagan boosting the defense budget by ten percent would have no significant effect on Russians submitting and running up the white flag of surrender. Russians determined their own fate, and if the ending of the USSR can even be attributed to one person, that person was the reformer Mikhail Gorbachev.
Click to expand...

The collapse started under Reagan and it collapsed because their economy collapsed under hyperinflation making their currency literally worth less than their toilet paper. Gorbachev's was a party man and wanted to maintain both the Soviet Union and one party rule so spare me your revisionism.
 
FreeSpeech said:
Not while globalists who take their marching orders from the CCP hold disproportionate control in both US parties, cheer Emperor Xi's plan for global dominance at Davos, and control the entirety of the MSM, entertainment industry, and the tech industry. Not to mention CCP infiltration of the University System through so called "Confucius Institutes".

As an example of what we're up against Obama's former ambassador to China just went on CNN and likened criticism of China to the rise of Hitler in the 30s:

Baucus: “The administration’s rhetoric is so strong against China, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s over the top. Very sad, we’re entering a kind of era which is similar to Joe McCarthy, uh, back when he was red-baiting the State Department and attacking communism. And a little bit like Hitler! In the Thirties, um that a lot of people knew what was going on was wrong. They knew it was wrong. But they didn’t stand up and say anything about it. They felt intimidated. And now in the United States if anybody says anything reasonable about China he or she feels intimidated. Afraid his head’s gonna be chopped off. And back in the Thirties in Germany there, it was very similar. People who were responsible uh, in the U.S. and especially responsible in Germany couldn’t speak up. And I worry that some of that is happening now. And it’s very dangerous. And I think it’s happening in part because the Republican administration of Donald Trump uh, realizes that the economy is not doing well probably because of the coronavirus. And, uh, they’ve therefore have to pivot. They have to blame somebody. And they’re blaming China. And it’s gonna be very difficult to get back on track after the election–whoever’s elected.”

Gorani: “Okay, uh, uh, be-before I go, I mean the comparison you’re making here between the, the current U.S. uh, atmosphere in Washington and uh, Germany in the Thirties, I mean that, that’a a very, that’s a very sss, you know, kind of, is it, is it, are you being provocative? Or do you really believe that there are parallels?”

Baucus: “I think we’re moving in that direction. Um, and I, it’s, I’m not saying we’re there yet. But there are a lot of very responsible people in America who know that this China bashing is irresponsible and we’re gonna pay a price the more it continues. That’s what I’m saying. But they’re afraid to speak up because they’re afraid that they’ll be criticized.”


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...ronavirus-baucus-advisory-boards-alibaba-cia/

The only way for the industrial democracies to prevent Chinese global hegemony from becoming a reality and to preserve the Westphalian system is for nationalists like Trump, Abe, and Bolsanaro to keep winning and for others to join their ranks on the global stage.
Click to expand...
Well that is just horrid...:palm: to bad most of it is true...... "Corporate America today is the lobbying arm of the Chinese Communist Party and Wall Street is the investor relations department," Steve Bannon.

Thus far only Sweden has kicked their asses out, I believe there are over 85 "institutes" operating here in the USA.. Why they are allowing it is anyone's guess:whome:

IMHO The Ambassador is correct, our most recent example was the NBA shameless kowtowing the CCP for an employee daring to exercise his free speech in a manner not of their liking....... Made me sick to watch........

Thanks for the post........hats-off-salute-smiley-emoticon.gif
 
Grajonca said:
.
Excellent idea, they must not be allowed to profit off this.

Bill introduced in US Congress to stop predatory acquisitions by China during Covid-19 pandemic

WASHINGTON: An influential American Congressman on Wednesday introduced a legislation in the House of Representatives that would prevent predatory investments of American companies by the Chinese government. Introduced by Congressman Jim Banks, member of the House Armed Services Committee, the Restricting Predatory Acquisition During COVID-19 Act would expand the scope of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to review purchases by companies with ties to the Chinese Communist Party during the COVID-19 pandemic. "Our job is to ensure the Chinese Communist Party does not profit off a pandemic of their own making. President Trump won an election vowing to stop China from taking advantage of Americans. I am glad to be working with him now to stop Chinese predation," Banks said in a statement. The bill proposes to increase the scope of cases the CFIUS reviews and sends to the president prior to a financial transaction. It will prevent companies with ties to the People's Republic of China from owning more than 51 per cent of shares in the critical infrastructure, as defined by the Defense Production Act of 1950, organisations engaged in the production and dissemination of news media, or entities otherwise determined to be critical to national security, critical infrastructure, or culturally significant by the president. Congressman Sharice Davids on Wednesday introduced a legislation to rapidly increase the supply of equipment like face masks, hospital gowns, ventilators and testing materials needed to fight the coronavirus and keep the frontline workers safe. The bill would also promote manufacturing these goods in the United States. "We have seen first hand that relying on China to produce the vast majority of medical equipment we use in the US is a big problem," Davids said. "It has led to shortages, price gouging and a surge...

Read the full article

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/75590513.cms
Click to expand...

Well I would def like to see this pass, one has to wonder why in the fuck we would be allowing purchases to be made by the communist party period..
 
Cypress said:
We have extremely poor, subpar, and chaotic leadership right now .
Click to expand...
yur partisan perspective. I'm super happy. Trump did an excellent job on trade, getting out of foreign wars ( if only the damn interventionists wold get us out of Syria) and would have repaired relations with Russia if not fr the Russian hoax

The way to offset Chinese power is by exercising our traditional role in international institutions, traditional alliances, and having the leadership to enhance and strengthen those institutions. That is a proven and tested framework which has worked for eight decades.
Click to expand...
like what exactly? The way to mitigate China is to stop their malign practices, get a decent Trade agreement, and keep the shipping lanes open for the S.China Sea. Ask Vietnam if they want us there -they do
An isolationist, America First policy will only concede world influence to China at our expense.
Click to expand...
false conflation. economic nationalism is not isolationism
 
Bill said:
Well that is just horrid...:palm: to bad most of it is true...... "Corporate America today is the lobbying arm of the Chinese Communist Party and Wall Street is the investor relations department," Steve Bannon.

Thus far only Sweden has kicked their asses out, I believe there are over 85 "institutes" operating here in the USA.. Why they are allowing it is anyone's guess:whome:
Click to expand...

Because they bribed their way in with tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

IMHO The Ambassador is correct, our most recent example was the NBA shameless kowtowing the CCP for an employee daring to exercise his free speech in a manner not of their liking....... Made me sick to watch........

Thanks for the post........View attachment 15222
Click to expand...

What? The former ambassador is correct in his assertion that criticizing China is akin to being Hitler? You seem to be contradicting yourself.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
whether it will still be communist or not I think it is inevitable that China will dominate the economic world.......they are what, half the population of the world........the US is currently the economic dominator because of the buying power of our consumers.........if the Chinese ever achieve even one fourth of our average disposable income every market in the world will focus on what the Chinese consumer wants to buy.....
Click to expand...

I believe you are correct

I also believe they are well on their way to achieving that

As the largest economy the USA is also the World's Reserve Currency, thoughts on that continuing when the USA is no longer the largest economy?
 
FreeSpeech said:
The collapse started under Reagan and it collapsed because their economy collapsed under hyperinflation making their currency literally worth less than their toilet paper. Gorbachev's was a party man and wanted to maintain both the Soviet Union and one party rule so spare me your revisionism.
Click to expand...

^ Spoon fed propaganda from years of listening to Rush Limbaugh.

Gorbachev was among many reformers in Russia who knew the totalitarian soviet system needed radical reform; that the cold war had to wind down . Those reformers were going to act independent of Bedtime for Bonzo.

Reagan's evil empire rhetoric, SDI, and the Carter-Reagan defense budget increases if anything prolonged the cold war, nor shortened it. Because it gave hardliners in the Kremlin ammunition that America had hostile intentions, thus making it harder for Gorbachev and his reformers to convince the collective Soviet leadership that radical change was needed
 
Cypress said:
^ Spoon fed propaganda from years of listening to Rush Limbaugh.

Gorbachev was among many reformers in Russia who knew the totalitarian soviet system needed radical reform . Those reformers were going to act independent of Bedtime for Bonzo.

Reagan's evil empire rhetoric, SDI, and the Carter-Reagan defense budget increases if anything prolonged the cold war, nor shortened it. Because it gave hardliners in the Kremlin ammunition that America had hostile intentions, thus making it harder for Gorbachev and his reformers to convince Soviet leadership that radical change was needed
Click to expand...

Reagan forced them to spend money they didn't have under an economic system that was already failing and it caused their entire system to collapse under the weight of hyperinflation. The radical change Gorbachev wanted was economic as the piecemeal reforms of the 70s had failed to help the stagnating economy. Gorbachev was not seeking radical political reform he wanted to maintain one party communist rule and the integrity of the Soviet Union.
 
Cypress said:
We have extremely poor, subpar, and chaotic leadership right now .

The way to offset Chinese power is by exercising our traditional role in international institutions, traditional alliances, and having the leadership to enhance and strengthen those institutions. That is a proven and tested framework which has worked for eight decades.

An isolationist, America First policy will only concede world influence to China at our expense.
Click to expand...

I agree, it seems that strengthening, not weakening these institutions, especially right now, is the correct direction, especially while China is successfully setting up & managing competing institutions, alliances & trade..

I could be wrong (& welcome your thoughts) but I think the premise here, economically anyway, is a belief that trump can cut a better deal w/ one country than w/ several negotiating on the other side..... This seems to assume country X is alone(lacking alternatives) going up against the world's largest economy~when in fact that is hardly the case, @ least for about 160 of them that are already signed up w/ BRI trade deals from China/government subsidized corporations......
 
FreeSpeech said:
Reagan forced them to spend money they didn't have under an economic system that was already failing and it caused their entire system to collapse under the weight of hyperinflation. The radical change Gorbachev wanted was economic as the piecemeal reforms of the 70s had failed to help the stagnating economy. Gorbachev was not seeking radical political reform he wanted to maintain one party communist rule and the integrity of the Soviet Union.
Click to expand...

The Russians have proved time and and again they are willing to starve and suffer any deprivation if they feel they are actually threatened by a viable enemy.

Reagan's defense budget profited defense contractors, but it did not make Soviet leadership cower in fear and feel they had no choice but to submit to Reagan's macho display
 
FreeSpeech said:
Because they bribed their way in with tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.



What? The former ambassador is correct in his assertion that criticizing China is akin to being Hitler? You seem to be contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...

Not correct~ thus the NBA kowtow......

They, like any other country should be criticized & held accountable..
 
Cypress said:
^ Spoon fed propaganda from years of listening to Rush Limbaugh.

Gorbachev was among many reformers in Russia who knew the totalitarian soviet system needed radical reform; that the cold war had to wind down . Those reformers were going to act independent of Bedtime for Bonzo.

Reagan's evil empire rhetoric, SDI, and the Carter-Reagan defense budget increases if anything prolonged the cold war, nor shortened it. Because it gave hardliners in the Kremlin ammunition that America had hostile intentions, thus making it harder for Gorbachev and his reformers to convince the collective Soviet leadership that radical change was needed
Click to expand...

yes, it gave them ammo but not the money to pay for it.. (Personally I don't care why they dissolved outside the fact that it was not brought about via a military confrontation).........

Anyway I would hope that the USA & China have the forethought to continue competing economically, as we did w/ the USSR- avoiding open military conflict..
 
Bill said:
yes, it gave them ammo but not the money to pay for it.. (Personally I don't care why they dissolved outside the fact that it was not brought about via a military confrontation).........

Anyway I would hope that the USA & China have the forethought to continue competing economically, as we did w/ the USSR- avoiding open military conflict..
Click to expand...

In terms of all the tanks, ships, and artillery pieces Reagan purchased, the Soviets always had and always would have sufficient military strength to repel any American or NATO invasion. I do not believe they were ever worried in the least that American conventional forces were a threat to USSR or Eastern Europe. I mean, other than the prestige factor of having the world's fanciest military.

What concerned them was a nuclear first strike from the U.S..

I give Reagan credit for turning into a Dove, much to the chagrin of Red Scare hardliners hawks in his administration, and reaching out to Gorbachev in a genuine (if ultimately insignificant) effort to agree to wind down the cold war
 
floridafan said:
No administration in our history has president over the deficits we currently have. No administration in our history has president over a 9 trillion deficit in less that 4 years. Deal with the facts my dear, this is a total disaster.
Click to expand...

Obama's deficits totaled 10T....at least Trump has managed to keep the House from spending 12T.....
 
Bill said:
I believe you are correct

I also believe they are well on their way to achieving that

As the largest economy the USA is also the World's Reserve Currency, thoughts on that continuing when the USA is no longer the largest economy?
Click to expand...

well, the Europeans tried to remain relevant by creating the EU......didn't work.......guess I will leave that up to my grandchildren, as it will take at least that long to come close to happening......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top