But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao...

:rofl: OMG, I can't believe you wrote that. You and common sense are strangers, my friend. In fact, you're polar opposites. And I'm not just referring to your comments regarding OWS.

You are to be thanked, Apple. You are performing a useful social service. Without you the poor old lady (Trixie) would have been up to her old tricks of frog skinning and molesting goats. Your valuable contribution has made it unnecessary for the rest of us to turn from our day to day duties of TV watching and American baiting. Thank you once again.
 
John Lennon was just warning about being open about your beliefs too. Lets face it, he was a communist at heart.

John Lennon? What are you talking about? He was a republican...just like MLK Jr.!

Maybe you shouldn't be posting there Winter, you seem to have your political and cultural history all messed up.
 
I had a feeling I didn't dumb it down enough for you. I misjudged how dumb you really are. Mea culpa.

Yes, killing the wealthy failed but the wealthy were killed, nonetheless. That is the point and from a logical viewpoint it makes more sense to share than be killed. That is the point. The current way things are going will not last. Do you not see the OWS demonstrators? Do you not see Obama trying to get social programs in place?

This nonsense about the government not being able to look after it's citizens, the garbage talk about the country on the verge of bankruptcy, is the talk of the greedy. As more and more people lose their homes, lose their jobs, slip into poverty, things are going to get worse. And it's coming. Whether Maoist philosophy works or doesn't work is immaterial. The disadvantaged, the poor, the hungry, the homeless, the jobless don't give a damn about philosophy. They see people with an abundance while they are suffering and they are going to change things.

Now, either the wealthy play along or, as history has shown, over and over, they end up with the short end of the stick. The outcome has always been the same. Either the wealthy volunteer to share or a revolution results. That's just the way it is.

Now do you understand?

Probably not. How are you with Chimpanzee sign language?
 
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow.

The poignant verse penned by John Lennon years ago, and recorded by the Beatles in the song, Revolution, gives amazing insight into the OWS movement. How many of you were actually aware that the protesters are advocating Maoist philosophy? I bet not many, because in every interview and news report, while 'leaders' and 'followers' struggle with what exactly they hope to accomplish, they avoid mentioning it is the precise message of former Chairman Mao. Because of the brilliance and wisdom of Lennon, they realize they can't just come out and tell us they support Maoist philosophy, we would shun and ostracize them in short order... you ain't gonna make it with anyone, if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao. So they yammer around and speak in platitudes about the 1% vs. the 99%... Greedy capitalists making money off the poor... the overall inequity of wealth.

If you take some time to look up Chairman Mao Zedong, and you read about the "People's Revolution" in China, which brought Mao to power, it is uncanny the remarkable resemblance to the message of the OWS movement. Almost universally, the points are the same, and the objectives of the protests are identical. Mao believed that China's wealth must be redistributed, that the 'upper class' had gained far too much advantage over the average citizen, and that if they could just balance economic equity among the masses, it would unleash his country's greatness. Through class envy, Mao initiated this class warfare, the same as we currently see Liberals engaging in today. He and his sycophants worked the population into a frenzy, eventually overthrowing the government and paving the way for the Mao Dynasty. Oh, it was all done with the best of intentions, everyone, including John Lennon, thought Mao's ideas would work... if only they could confiscate the rich people's money and give it to the poor!

Shortly after Mao came into power, he implemented a host of anti-capitalist policy, China became isolationists, refusing to trade with capitalists or participate in the capitalist markets. Of course, this resulted in dramatically decreased trade revenues, and fostered widespread poverty across China. Mao began by closing banks and financial institutions, arresting bankers and businessmen who engaged in capitalism, executing those who breached his stringent anti-capitalist measures. When conditions in China began to worsen, and the people who had caused the revolution began to get restless, Mao kicked it up a notch, he began literally killing off the wealthy population, and confiscating their fortunes. In theory, if they killed the richest 1%, and gave the money to the 99%... things would be better economically. In practicality, it didn't work. As the central government realized the windfall from executing the rich, the people in the government became more greedy and corrupt, and the money which was supposed to filter down to the masses, never made it to them, instead, it was gobbled up by the political elite, who then controlled all the power in China.

In the end, it is estimated Mao executed 3-4 million "political prisoners" (their only crime was being wealthy.) The Maoist philosophy (same as OWS) never worked... even after sparking an all-out revolution and overthrowing the government. Still, the followers of the philosophy didn't give up, they pressed on... sparking the same revolution in Cambodia decades later, leading to the infamous reign of Pol Pot. Now... Pol Pot believed totally in Mao's philosophy, he just thought Mao implemented it incorrectly. With a few 'tweaks' he just knew the idea could work. The biggest problem Pol Pot had with Mao's implementation, is that he allowed too much time to pass before he started executing the wealthy, and he spent too much time trying to justify the killing. So Pol Pot immediately began mass executions, to get the wealth redistributed more quickly, before the government turned corrupt.... but the problem is, people who are killing folks for being wealthy, are already pretty darned corrupt to begin with. After setting the record for most heinous and brutal dictator in human history, Pol Pot was finally stopped by Vietnam... Communist Vietnam! Yes, it became so atrocious, reprehensible and intolerable, the other COMMIES had to intervene to stop it!

You say you want a Revolution?

Do you, really?

I thought I would re-post the OP, since most of you pinheads have now subverted the thread into a smart ass discussion of John Lennon's politics. The segue into the actual OP came after the first sentence. This thread was never about John Lennon, or what John Lennon believed politically. It was merely pointed out, that Lennon penned the line, which observes that you can't go around promoting Maoist Communism, you will get nowhere fast... it's better to keep it under your hat, talk in platitudes and generalities, advocate the policies and principles of Maoism, but don't ever call it that... or it's over. We see that in the OWS movement, largely a group of people who seriously want a Maoist philosophy implemented, that's what they have said, over and over, repeatedly, every time anyone from the OWS camp tries to explain their ideals and objectives.

Now, maybe you are like a lot of Americans, and you slept through World History, or maybe the Liberal School Systems have simply failed to teach the historical information available, but for some reason, many Libtards think of Mao as some kind of hero. His reign in China, is one of the most economically dismal times in the country's long history, as well as one of the most brutal and inhumane. Millions of people were killed or imprisoned, because they dared engage in evil capitalism. The Bankers, they were first on the chopping block... those evil bankers who controlled all the people's wealth... they had to go! Does any of this sound familiar? I think it sounds remarkably familiar, they just aren't carrying pictures of Chairman Mao.
 
Others have no problem following along. If you do then the problem should be obvious.

This is you lying, again.
Others have also said that you tend to spin a discussion, in a direction that makes you more comfortable and that you ignore the original comments.
 
Link? Any back-up? ..............Why do I even bother asking.

Why do you?

JPP righties like USFreeDumb & doublewide Dixie think that if they say it, it must be true, and they seem to regard any demand for proof as extraordinary.

Hilarious.
 
Why do you?

JPP righties like USFreeDumb & doublewide Dixie think that if they say it, it must be true, and they seem to regard any demand for proof as extraordinary.

Hilarious.

Chairman Mao is a historic figure, there is a ton of information online and elsewhere about his rise to power and reign as leader of China. No "proof" is needed of this, it is documented history. His ideology and how he implemented it in China, is also a matter of public record, no "proof" need be given, it is history. His philosophy was identical to the OWS protesters, the rich don't pay their fair share, wealth redistribution, the whole bit... this too, is a matter of historic record. Your problem is, you can't really argue with history, so you demand that we PROVE history! And... if we can't PROVE history, it must not be true! If we can't post some links so you can divert the topic into a debate over sources, if we can't give you some way to wiggle out of the discussion or change the debate... then you aren't playing the game! And yes, this is all a big fucking GAME to you! You can't debate the topic because you know I am absolutely right, and nailed it from the start, so your ONLY hope, is to continue to flounder around and try to derail the conversation by any means necessary. I'm BORED with your GAME!
 
Chairman Mao is a historic figure, there is a ton of information online and elsewhere about his rise to power and reign as leader of China. No "proof" is needed of this, it is documented history. His ideology and how he implemented it in China, is also a matter of public record, no "proof" need be given, it is history. His philosophy was identical to the OWS protesters, the rich don't pay their fair share, wealth redistribution, the whole bit... this too, is a matter of historic record. Your problem is, you can't really argue with history, so you demand that we PROVE history! And... if we can't PROVE history, it must not be true! If we can't post some links so you can divert the topic into a debate over sources, if we can't give you some way to wiggle out of the discussion or change the debate... then you aren't playing the game! And yes, this is all a big fucking GAME to you! You can't debate the topic because you know I am absolutely right, and nailed it from the start, so your ONLY hope, is to continue to flounder around and try to derail the conversation by any means necessary. I'm BORED with your GAME!

They may have had similar philosophies but that proves nothing.

You and I share the desire to eat. I eat a light salad you eat double hamburger with chips and apple pie and a large coke.
Then for good measure you stumble next door to Dunking Doughnuts (or whatever you call it) and scoff a dozen.
We are both eating but the methods and results could not be more different.

Mao's revolution was basically an agrarian revolution but it was motivated by the Japanese, the Nationalists and the Russians. The OWS crowd simply want a more level playing field.
 
They may have had similar philosophies but that proves nothing.

You and I share the desire to eat. I eat a light salad you eat double hamburger with chips and apple pie and a large coke.
Then for good measure you stumble next door to Dunking Doughnuts (or whatever you call it) and scoff a dozen.
We are both eating but the methods and results could not be more different.

Mao's revolution was basically an agrarian revolution but it was motivated by the Japanese, the Nationalists and the Russians. The OWS crowd simply want a more level playing field.

No, they had IDENTICAL philosophies. Again, history doesn't have to be proven.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution
The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, commonly known as the Cultural Revolution (Chinese: 文化大革命, Wénhuà Dàgémìng), was a socio-political movement that took place in the People's Republic of China from 1966 through 1976. Set into motion by Mao Zedong, then Chairman of the Communist Party of China, its stated goal was to enforce socialism in the country by removing capitalist, traditional and cultural elements from Chinese society, and to impose Maoist orthodoxy within the Party. The revolution marked the return of Mao Zedong to a position of absolute power after the failed Great Leap Forward. The movement paralyzed the country politically and significantly impacted the country economically and socially.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoist
Definitions of Maoism vary. Within the Chinese context, Maoism can refer to Mao's belief in the mobilization of the masses, particularly in large-scale political movements; it can also refer to the egalitarianism that was seen during Mao's era as opposed to the free-market ideology of Deng Xiaoping; some scholars additionally define personality cults and political sloganeering as "Maoist" practices. Contemporary Maoists in China criticize the social inequalities created by a capitalist and 'revisionist' Communist party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianism
Egalitarianism (from French égal, meaning "equal") is a trend of thought that favors equality of some sort among moral agents, whether persons or animals. Emphasis is placed upon the fact that equality contains the idea of equity of quality. That is, all people should be treated with the same dignity or be regarded as possessing the same intrinsic qualities despite our societal diversity of race, religion, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, political affiliation, socioeconomic status, (dis)ability or cultural heritage.

The OWS crowd want exactly the same thing that Mao Zedong wanted. They seek to cause a revolution, just as Mao did in the name of "the people" ...to DESTROY CAPITALISM... to implement SOCIALISM... To redistribute the wealth so that everyone has economic equality. Across the board, down to the last detail, it is MAOIST philosophy!

When we look at the results of what happened in China under Mao, the atrocities, the human rights violations, the destitute poverty created, the complete and absolute FAILURE of the ideas on every level... we MUST, as thinking rational people, reject the idea that we need to REPEAT this again!

Now you pinheads can dance around and pontificate on how you don't think it's the same as Maoism, and bitch because I haven't "proven history" or whatever... the record speaks for itself. History doesn't lie, it is what it is. There are people who learn from the mistakes of history, and there are people who are completely IGNORANT of history. Which are you?
 
Dixie you are real close to the gestapo and the SS. except your further right

You are entitled to your opinion, unfortunately, you'd be hard pressed to present any evidence to suggest that about me. But don't let the truth stop you, moron!

Here's what I believe, in a nutshell... I am conservative, both fiscal and social, and those are my personal viewpoints. I realize I am not the King, and that people are not obligated to follow whatever I want to be the law of the land. We live in a democratic society where everyone has a voice and a vote, and I respect the wishes of the majority, whatever they may be. I don't have to agree. I believe 90% of the social issues between liberals and conservatives (and libertarians) could be resolved, if we were all open-minded enough to do so. Instead, we remain stubbornly mired in our precious ideologies, refusing to budge an inch.... and we allow politicians to use this attribute to keep us pitted against one another, so they can maintain political power and clout.
 
Back
Top