Black Lives Mater, a Marxist Organization

Any time the President puts the religious people in their place is awesome.

why would that matter? It's not like he wrote it.

Did Marx ever lead a country?

Since it was ghost written for him, no.

Marxville...Marxistan...San Marxo...

Maybe.

Y'know who convinced my stupid 20-something self to spout dumbshit lines like this back at TNZ, and early WF?
Storm.
Just saying.

Considering how you butchered the thread title I would have to say that you have no room to sneer.

Except the "I'm the president and I'm the lord over you in this house" attitude hasn't aged well.

Likewise, The Newsroom, another Sorkin show, should be mandatory viewing for anyone before they criticize big media.

I had high hopes for that show, hoping that Sorkin could get back on the horse after the terrible Studio 60. But The Newsroom never got anywhere near good as TWW or even Sports Night.

Are you familiar with The John Birch Society? Most people these days have no idea of who they are, since they fell out of favor in the 70s or so. They're a group (and yes, they're still around) of rabid anti-communists (they accused Reagan of being a liberal) who often pushed the idea of "The Long Game." After the Soviet Union fell, they claimed that it was a "Long Game" ruse to trick the US into disarming so that the Soviets could invade and conquer the world.

The point being that such claims are as moldy as Lenin's corpse. If you study enough human history, you learn that things like "The Long Game" are largely figments of the imagination. Very few organizations, let alone people, have the ability to think in long timescales. Those that do are almost always part of something that's been around for a very long time. We're talking centuries, and even then, much of what you see are merely incidental results of other actions. The Catholic Church is one example of an organization that thinks in centuries. They're only able to do this because they've been around for over 1700 years. Marxism, as a philosophy, hasn't even been in existence for 200 years, there's no Marxist state, or even a Marxist organization, really. At best, you have a bunch of rabble-rousers and cranky academics who spout Marxist ideology, often with the sole purpose of seeming "edgy."

Leaving all that aside, saying that BLM is a bad movement because one of the founders is a Marxist is no different than saying that we should scrap the Constitution because a few of its authors owned slaves. While there are a number of problems inherent in the Constitution because of the influence of slavery, that doesn't mean that many of the ideals contained within it aren't meritorious and should be values embraced by everyone. The same is true of the BLM movement. Look, you're still able to like Star Trek, even though you dislike the current incarnations of it, so you should be able to grasp the idea that some of the unrelated beliefs held by members of BLM don't necessarily mean that the goal of reducing the number of civilians killed by police is a good objective.

This is going about as well as one of @Federal Farmer ’s call out threads

I absolutely think such a person is capable of existing, but they would never be voted into office.

Shrug, do it all you want, I got that chip off my shoulder about 10 years ago. Also I was pretty naive, so it’s not surprising I fell for such an obvious scam.

I’m going to agree and leave it at. I’m abandoning the thread now.

I was going to give you shit, but admitting you were wrong is hard so props to you.

Definition of the ad hominem fallacy: thinking that by pointing out some negative aspect of the person who advanced an argument, you have somehow disproven the validity of the argument.

Only ignorant people resort to ad hominem fallacies.

Don't be ignorant.

So does @Amaris, can you see her killing and stomping on graves?

What, exactly, does Marxist mean to you?

Bear in mind here I'm a long way from being a communist, left leaning or not.

Therefore...all organisations with which she's associated are automatically Marxist?

Indeed, if only because anything they had to say couldn't be reduced to a four word slogan.

I think FF may have been listening to this guy (GOP candidate for Michigan House whose daughter just asked folk not to vote for him):

So R Regan doesn't like socialism?

It's such a weird stance to take because it logically doesn't make sense.

There are indisputably worse outcomes for the average black person in the US compared to the national averages. That being the case there are three possibilities.

1. Systemic racism.
2. Black people are less capable.
3. Random choice just rolling that way.

If you rule out 1 it leaves 2 and 3. 3 is infitesimely unlikely given the sample size which leaves you with 2. But if you believe 2 then you are by definition racist, and as someone running for government and thinking your views are mainstream you must think others share those views, which means that racism is part of the system.

That is the single most concise breakdown of this particular logical fallacy I've ever seen.

Considering it was ghosted, he probably doesn't know half of what's in it.

Everything you should have known about Der Drumpfenfuhrer was evident when he was New York's Most Egregious Slumlord.

Not really a like for like comparison in fairness.

Marx was an influential political philosopher, Trump is not. Marx wrote extensively on his own ideas, Trump was a minor TV celebrity who paid someone else to write a book because it would increase his public profile.

Like or loathe communism it's worth understanding what it is, where it came from and what it's legacy in the world has been. Doing that from an honest and objective standpoint will always be far more informative than going to a default position of seeing it as the enemy and working from there. If you read about it from a primarily American perspective you'll be no better informed than a Russian reading classical Russian literature about capitalism.

The truth is no one economic system can truly be said to be without it's faults and any real economy consists of some degree of hybridisation. Where and when a given principle is applied within that economy shapes how the resultant nation looks and fares.

Get a socialist principle right (eg apply it to operational defence or healthcare) and it will serve well, misapply it (eg to internal commerce ) and it becomes a hindrance.

Misapply any philosophy or principle and tie the political fortunes of an advantaged minority to it and you have a recipe for oppression.

I keep seeing the misspelling in the title and thinking Jacob Rees-Mogg is trying to explain the protests to his mother.

There is no systemic police brutality. Meanwhile, blacks are shooting each other by the hundreds in Chicago.