Jump to content

It Is Official!!


Recommended Posts

Since when did the term Skin Head refer to anything other than hate.

PaPa, way back in the early 80s, skinheads were associated with the Ska and Punk movements here and in Britain. I doubt that you were into either of these musical scenes back then. ;)

The skinheads that I know typically are very socially conscious and against racism, sexism, and other "isms."

Link to comment

Reverse that. The skinhead movement originated in England decades ago and was a movement against hate. Then we have jerks who steal the symbolism and pervert it.

S.H.A.R.P.

I was stationed in Germany when it began...sadly what I was there to stop from happening again, it started back up with the Skin Heads in America. Teach me to ever leave home again.
Link to comment

PaPa, way back in the early 80s, skinheads were associated with the Ska and Punk movements here and in Britain. I doubt that you were into either of these musical scenes back then. ;)

The skinheads that I know typically are very socially conscious and against racism, sexism, and other "isms."

Wistnessed the birth of both in their birthplace...I was trying to get historical perspective, but you may all poke fun and my age, I can deal.
Link to comment

I recall in high school we had two groups of skin heads. Those against racial prejudice and those for it. Unfortunately people didn't always know who was in which group as they dressed so similiarly. I dated a guy from the SHARP's. He was definitely against hate and discrimination, but unfortunately he was also prone to getting into fights either because people didn't know what he represented or because they would end up in fights with the opposite skin head group.

Hopefully today it is different compared to how it was 15 years ago.

Link to comment

Valentius;

While S.H.A.R.P. may stand against racial hate, I hardly consider the hammer and sickle (your current gravatar) symbols of peace. But to each his own I guess.

This is because you aren't paying attention to what the CPUSA stands for. From the 2001 Constitution and Wikipedia:

The CPUSA constitution and program

According to its 2001 Constitution, the party operates on the principle of democratic centralism , its highest authority being the quadrennial National Convention. Article VI, Section 3 of the 2001 Constitution lays out certain positions as non-negotiable:

"struggle for the unity of the working class, against all forms of national oppression, national chauvinism, discrimination and segregation, against all racist ideologies and practices… against all manifestations of male supremacy and discrimination against women… against homophobia and all manifestations of discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people…"

Among the points in the party's "Immediate Program" are a $12/hour minimum wage for all workers, national universal health care, and opposition to privatization of United States Social Security . Economic measures such as increased taxes on "the rich and corporations", "strong regulation" of the financial industry, "regulation and public ownership of utilities", and increased federal aid to cities and states; opposition to the Iraq War and other military interventions; opposition to free trade treaties such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); nuclear disarmament and a reduced military budget; various civil rights provisions; campaign finance reform including public financing of campaigns; and election law reform, including Instant Runoff Voting.

Bill of Rights socialism

The Communist Party USA emphasizes a vision of socialism as an extension of American democracy. Seeking to "build socialism in the United States based on the revolutionary traditions and struggles" of American history, the CPUSA promotes a conception of "Bill of Rights Socialism" that will "guarantee all the freedoms we have won over centuries of struggle, and also extend the Bill of Rights to include freedom from unemployment"– as well as freedom "from poverty, from illiteracy, and from discrimination and oppression."

Reiterating the idea of property rights in socialist society as it is outlined in Marx and Engel's Communist Manifesto the Communist Party emphasizes that

"Many myths have been propagated about socialism. Contrary to right-wing claims, socialism would not take away the personal private property of workers", but "the private ownership of major industries, financial institutions, and other large corporations, and the excessive luxuries of the super-rich."

Rather than making all wages entirely equal, the Communist Party USA holds that building socialism would entail "eliminating private wealth from stock speculation, from private ownership of large corporations, from the export of capital and jobs, and from the exploitation of large numbers of workers."

Living standards

Among the primary concerns of the Communist Party are the problems of unemployment underemployment and job insecurity, which Communism understands as the natural result of the profit-driven incentives of the capitalist economy.

"Millions of workers are unemployed, underemployed, or insecure in their jobs, even during economic upswings and periods of 'recovery' from recessions. Most workers experience long years of stagnant and declining real wages, while health and education costs soar. Many workers are forced to work second and third jobs to make ends meet. Most workers now average four different occupations during their lifetime, many involuntarily moved from job to job and career to career. Often, retirement-age workers are forced to continue working just to provide health care for themselves and their families. Millions of people continuously live below the poverty level; many suffer homelessness and hunger. Public and private programs to alleviate poverty and hunger do not reach everyone, and are inadequate even for those they do reach. With capitalist globalization, jobs move from place to place as capitalists export factories and even entire industries to other countries in a relentless search for the lowest wages."

The Communist Party believes that "class struggle starts with the fight for wages, hours, benefits, working conditions, job security, and jobs. But it also includes an endless variety of other forms for fighting specific battles: resisting speed-up, picketing, contract negotiations, strikes, demonstrations, lobbying for pro-labor legislation, elections, and even general strikes." The Communist Party's national programs understands that workers who struggle "against the capitalist class or any part of it on any issue with the aim of improving or defending their lives" are part of the class struggle.

Imperialism and war

The Communists maintain that developments within the foreign policy of the United States–as reflected in the rise of neoconservatives and other groups associated with right-wing politics–have developed in tandem with the interests of large-scale capital such as the multinational corporations. The state thereby becomes thrust into a proxy role that is essentially inclined to help facilitate "control by one section of the capitalist class over all others and over the whole of society."

Accordingly, the Communist Party holds that right-wing policymakers such as the neoconservatives, steering the state away from working-class interests on behalf of a disproportionately powerful capitalist class, have

"...demonized foreign opponents of the U.S., covertly funded the right-wing-initiated civil war in Nicaragua, and gave weapons to the Saddam Hussein dictatorship in Iraq. They picked small countries to invade, including Panama and Grenada, testing new military equipment and strategy, and breaking down resistance at home and abroad to U.S. military invasion as a policy option."

From its ideological framework, the Communist Party understands imperialism as the pinnacle of capitalist development: the state, working on behalf of the few who wield disproportionate power, assumes the role of proffering "phony rationalizations" for economically driven imperial ambition as a means to promote the sectional economic interests of big business.

In opposition to what it considers the ultimate agenda of the conservative wing of U.S. politics, the Communist Party rejects such foreign policy proposals as the Bush Doctrine, rejecting the right of the American government to attack

"any country it wants, to conduct war without end until it succeeds everywhere, and even to use 'tactical' nuclear weapons and militarize space. Whoever does not support the U.S. policy is condemned as an opponent. Whenever international organizations, such as the United Nations, do not support U.S. government policies, they are reluctantly tolerated until the U.S. government is able to subordinate or ignore them."

Juxtaposing the support from the Republicans and the right wing of the Democratic Party for the Bush administration-led invasion of Iraq with the many millions of Americans who opposed the invasion of Iraq from its beginning, the Communist Party notes the spirit of opposition towards the war coming from the American public:

"Thousands of grassroots peace committees [were] organized by ordinary Americans... neighborhoods, small towns and universities expressing opposition in countless creative ways. Thousands of actions, vigils, teach-ins and newspaper advertisements were organized. The largest demonstrations were held since the Vietnam War. 500,000 marched in New York after the war started. Students at over 500 universities conducted a Day of Action for 'Books Not Bombs.'

"Over 150 anti-war resolutions were passed by city councils. Resolutions were passed by thousands of local unions and community organizations. Local and national actions were organized on the Internet, including the 'Virtual March on Washington, D.C.'... officials were flooded with millions of calls, emails and letters.

"In an unprecedented development, large sections of the US labor movement officially opposed the war. In contrast, it took years to build labor opposition to the Vietnam War... Chicago labor leaders formed Labor United for Peace, Justice and Prosperity. They concluded that mass education of their members was essential to counter false propaganda, and that the fight for the peace, economic security and democratic rights was interrelated.

The Party has consistently opposed U.S. involvement in the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the First Gulf War , and the post-September 11 conflicts in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

The CPUSA does not believe that the threat of terrorism can be resolved through war.

Women and minorities

The Communist Party USA's Constitution defines the working class as a class which is "multiracial, multinational, and unites men and women, young and old, employed and unemployed, organized and unorganized, gay and straight, native-born and immigrant, urban and rural, and composed of workers who perform a large range of physical and mental labor–the vast majority of our society."

The Communist Party seeks equal rights for women, equal pay for equal work, the protection of reproductive rights, together with putting an end to sexism. The Party's ranks include a Women's Equality Commission, which recognizes the role of women as an asset in moving towards building socialism.

Historically significant in American history as an early fighter for African Americans' rights and playing a leading role in protesting the lynchings of African Americans in the South, the Communist Party, in its national program today, calls racism the "classic divide-and-conquer tactic...." From its New York City base, the Communist Party's Ben Davis Club and other Communist Party organizations have been involved in local activism in Harlem and other African American and minority communities.The Communist Party was instrumental in the founding of the progressive Black Radical Congress in 1998.

Historically significant in Latino working class history as a successful organizer of the Mexican American working class in the Southwestern United States in the 1930s, the Communist Party regards working-class Latino people as another oppressed group targeted by overt racism as well as systemic discrimination in areas such as education, and sees the participation of Latino voters in a general mass movement in both party-based and nonpartisan work as an essential goal for major left-wing progress.

The Communist Party holds that racial and ethnic discrimination not only harms minorities, but is pernicious to working-class people of all backgrounds, as any discriminatory practices between demographic sections of the working class constitute an inherently divisive practice responsible for "obstructing the development of working-class consciousness, driving wedges in class unity to divert attention from class exploitation, and creating extra profits for the capitalist class."

The Communists support an end to racial profiling. The party supports continued enforcement of civil rights laws as well as affirmative action.

The CPUSA endorsed LGBT rights in a 2005 statement. CPUSA affirmed the resolution with a statement a year later in honorof gay pride month in June, 2006.

The environment

The Communist Party notes its commitment to participating in environmental movements wherever possible, emphasizing the significance of building unity between the environmental movement and other progressive tendencies.

The Party's most recently released environmental document–the CPUSA National Committee's "2008 Global Warming Report"–takes note of the necessity of "major changes in how we live, move, produce, grow, and market." These changes, the Communists believe, cannot be effectively accomplished solely on the basis of profit considerations:

"They require long-term planning, massive investment in redesigning and re-engineering, collective input, husbanding resources, social investment in research for long-term sustainability, and major conservation efforts...Various approaches blame the victims. Supposedly the only solution is to change individual consumer choices, since people in general are claimed to cause the problem. But consumers, workers, and poor people don’t have any say in energy plant construction, in decisions about trade or plant relocation or job export, in deciding on tax subsidies to polluting industries like the oil industry."

Supporting cooperation between economically advanced and less economically developed nations in the area of environmental cooperation, the Communist Party USA stands in favor of promoting

"transfer from developed countries to developing countries of sustainable technology, and funds for capital investment in sustainable agriculture, energy, and industry. We should support efforts to get the developed nations to make major contributions to a fund to protect the rainforests from devastation."

The Communist Party opposes drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge the use of nuclear power until (and unless) there is a safe way to dispose of its waste, and conceives of nuclear war as the greatest possible environmental threat.

Religion

The Communist Party is not against religion, but instead regards positively religious people's belief in justice, peace and respectful relations among the peoples. To build good relations with supporters of religion, the party has its own Religious Commission.

Communism has been tainted by corrupt political figures. Stalin, Bolsheviks, Castro, and Mao are not the standard for Communism.

BTW, Law of Consecration = Communism.

As for labeling the Hammer and Sickle as violent...perhaps you would like to explain the 'peaceful' demonstration of the American flag as Woodrow Wilson attempted to imperialize Mexico, Panama, Dominican Republic and Haiti. Also, please explain the 'peaceful' demonstration of the stars and stripes as the Peruvian government, with U.S. backed troops, burned homes to the ground, raped women and young girls, and murdered men, women and children.

The stars and stripes (I assume you love) is no less evil than the Hammer and Sickle or a Nazi Swastika. And NO!...this is not a Godwin's Law violation. It's an accurate portrayal based on historical evidence(s).

ETA: Sorry Mods, I had to correct a misconception. I did not want the thread to become political but I could not allow an old paradigm go unanswered. Please do not close the thread.

Edited by Valentinus
Link to comment

I recall in high school we had two groups of skin heads. Those against racial prejudice and those for it. Unfortunately people didn't always know who was in which group as they dressed so similiarly. I dated a guy from the SHARP's. He was definitely against hate and discrimination, but unfortunately he was also prone to getting into fights either because people didn't know what he represented or because they would end up in fights with the opposite skin head group.

Hopefully today it is different compared to how it was 15 years ago.

No, they still fight. I saw them fight at a Dropkick Murphy's show a while back. The Nazi Skinheads were removed from the venue.

Link to comment
BTW, Law of Consecration = Communism.

Correction: Law of Consecration = Serving the Lord thy God. That's antithical to how communism has been practiced.

Communism has been tainted by corrupt political figures. Stalin, Bolsheviks, Castro, and Mao are not the standard for Communism.

Whatever outcomes do you expect when state is placed in power to take everything away from everybody?

As for labeling the Hammer and Sickle as violent...perhaps you would like to explain the 'peaceful' demonstration of the American flag as Woodrow Wilson attempted to imperialize Mexico, Panama, Dominican Republic and Haiti.

LOL. Wilson was absolutely one of the most biggoted, rascist, and hateful presidents we ever had. He had open and outright disdain for the Constitution. The American flag was created to represnt those who died for a cause that colonies would bind together and create a federal government (which makes the states superior to the federal government) and to do so quite cautiously. President Wilson was a grave violator of the flag's meaning. He did absolutely no justice ot the American flag, sir.

Even so, the pain wrought by Wilson and the United States upon the world is utterly dwarfed by those who have hoisted the hammer and sickle. Stalin and Mao are, by far, two of the greatest mass murderes in history. The Law of Consercration has nothing to do with these horrific men. By the way, the LDS *still* covenant to live the Law of Consercration. It is, as it was in the past, designed to serve God and man. This is done for the glory of God, not man nor government.

Here let's give a hatip to my facebook friend and former bishop (a great man), Nick Rodriguez:

"The Lord works from the inside out. The world works from the outside in. The world would take people out of the slums. Christ takes the slums out of the people, and then they take themselves out of the slums. The world would mold men by changing their environment. The world would shape human behavior, but Christ can change human nature...Yes, Christ changes men, and changed men can change the world."

Ezra Taft Benson

That, sir, is what the Law of Consercration leads man towards.

I never cared for the Communist Party and reading your citation makes me care for them even less.

The Communist Party USA emphasizes a vision of socialism as an extension of American democracy. Seeking to "build socialism in the United States based on the revolutionary traditions and struggles" of American history, the CPUSA promotes a conception of "Bill of Rights Socialism" that will "guarantee all the freedoms we have won over centuries of struggle, and also extend the Bill of Rights to include freedom from unemployment"– as well as freedom "from poverty, from illiteracy, and from discrimination and oppression."

I would take the US Constition's negative liberties over guaranteed rights by a central government any day of the week. Ironically, the type of stuff you cite from the Communist Party, Woodrow Wilson would extend his 100% support for. FDR was all for this type of "guaranteed" rights / freedooms and he rounded up the Japanese Americans didn't he? He did so while purporting the need for a second bill of rights of sorts "guaranteeing" freedom and rights for all Americans. Our rights and freedoms come from God, not government, sir. Those who "guarantee" our freedoms in legal writings are the greatest violators of those freedoms. Which makes sense. If government is the provider of freedoms and rights than government will take away said freedoms and rights. If God is the one who provides our rights and freedoms than only God may take those away. I'd say that makes a huge difference in the scope of things.

Like I said before, to each his own I guess.

Edited by Darren10
Link to comment

A theocratically governed nation and system is more intensely flawed than Communism. God is not the author of the US Constitution especially considering that many of the founding fathers were secularists. Because you believe in automatically exclusive rights shows that you are anti-democracy. God has no place in government. Our rights and liberties are not granted by God but by human conscience and our ability to govern ourselves.

If you wanna determine the difference between Communism and the Law of Consecration based on divine providence then so be it. But it does not give weight to your argument. The Communism I desire provides humanity with paradise and utopia whereas the Law of Consecration may not.

Link to comment
Correction: Law of Consecration = Serving the Lord thy God. That's antithical to how communism has been practiced.

I'm sorry, but this ignorance of even fundamental facts gets very annoying. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union does not equal communism. They never claimed it did. Their frequent mantra was that they were building communism, IE, were not there yet. If the Law of Consecration is anything, it is communism. Remember, we are talking economic and social theory, not political parties.

Link to comment

A theocratically governed nation and system is more intensely flawed than Communism. God is not the author of the US Constitution especially considering that many of the founding fathers were secularists. Because you believe in automatically exclusive rights shows that you are anti-democracy. God has no place in government. Our rights and liberties are not granted by God but by human conscience and our ability to govern ourselves.

If you wanna determine the difference between Communism and the Law of Consecration based on divine providence then so be it. But it does not give weight to your argument. The Communism I desire provides humanity with paradise and utopia whereas the Law of Consecration may not.

Sir, what non religious people created a nation to the magnitude of the United States with all its unique freedoms? What non-Christian nation created its own demcracy in our moder-day world? Christianity and freedom go hand in hand. More than any other group of people in the world, Christians know from where freedom comes. And it's not government. Government is nothing more than an institution set up to uphold the natural rights of man. Natural rights exist because man exists as man. God is the author of our freedoms, not government. As James Madisen said (paraphrasing), government is set up to secure man's natural rights since men are not angels and therefore cannot govern himself as he should. But once gvernment is set up we the people must obligate it to govern itself. Empowering gvernment to "guarantee" freedoms and rights is the quickest way to loose said freedoms and rights for whatever man empowers government to do for him gvernment will naturally, in the course of time, seek to do against him. This is why government must be small and this is why the framers of the Constitution designed government to have its power split. It did so on the federal level by dividing power into three branches and then, and perhaps more significantly, it gave the federal government specific powers and left the rest (which is the vast majority of state power) to the states. The state and local governments are where the voice of the people truly lie; not in one strong central government.

The Communist Party, as you cited, is concerned with unemployment and their solution is to guarantee jobs, correct? I'd say that's precisely what FDR and our current president sought and is seeking. In both situations we witness high unemployment and a very prolongued depression / recession. Under President Coolidge, a depression lasted a year and it was over. Coolidge reduced taxes and federal spending. He did not resort to "guaranteeing" unemployment yet under his administration the US experienced a never repeated 2% unemployment. The formula for success is there and the Cmmunist Party stands in stark contrast to that formula.

I certainly do not want a theocracy and to think I purported one, I think, shows ignorance on your part as the nature of the US government. The US Constitution des not mention God and frankly I think God inspired the Founders to write it as such. To become legally theocratic is very volatile and inherently decadent. But while the Constitution is the physical body of the US gvernment its soal is found in the Declaration of Independence:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

In this context, God is the source of our freedoms and these freedoms are "unalienable". That means *no matter what* government cannot take away these freedoms from its citizens.

Edited by Darren10
Link to comment

I'm sorry, but this ignorance of even fundamental facts gets very annoying. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union does not equal communism. They never claimed it did. Their frequent mantra was that they were building communism, IE, were not there yet. If the Law of Consecration is anything, it is communism. Remember, we are talking economic and social theory, not political parties.

"Communism" serves the community. I do not consecrate anything to a community except the one which is governed directly by God.

Link to comment

I'm sorry, but this ignorance of even fundamental facts gets very annoying. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union does not equal communism. They never claimed it did. Their frequent mantra was that they were building communism, IE, were not there yet.

IE, "if we just do it better this time it'll work out". Any particular place you'd like to cite where "things worked out"?

Link to comment

The Communism I desire provides humanity with paradise and utopia whereas the Law of Consecration may not.

Such as Cuba? China? Russia? Romania? North Korea? Why would Poland move away from Communism (not that it has completely but it has in significant ways). Can you cite me anywhere which has achieved this "utopia"?

Edited by Darren10
Link to comment

IE you really didn't read what I said.

IE, I added to the logical end of your argument. No country has implemented communism, correct? So, if we just try it again a certain way, we can achieve it, or at least come closer to achieving it.

And about talking political parties, have you noticed tha I *never* mentioned one in this thread? Valentius has but I only spoke in ideas. Never did I cite a single political party except to respond to Valentius. So, who were you addressing?

Remember, we are talking economic and social theory, not political parties
Edited by Darren10
Link to comment

If you wanna determine the difference between Communism and the Law of Consecration based on divine providence then so be it. But it does not give weight to your argument. The Communism I desire provides humanity with paradise and utopia whereas the Law of Consecration may not.

Val, you have said some doozies on the board before, but this one beats them all. Communism and utopia used in the same sentence with a straight face? Please tell me that you are rolling on the floor in laughter. There is a better chace of ripping Jesus out of all that we know and then provide a weak shadow of a tiny portion of what he taught and declare we have found the way to heaven.

Link to comment

IE, I added to the logical end of your argument. No country has implemented communism, correct? So, if we just try it again a certain way, we can achieve it, or at least come closer to achieving it.

And about talking political parties, have you noticed tha I *never* mentioned one in this thread? Valentius has but I only spoke in ideas. Never did I cite a single political party except to respond to Valentius. So, who were you addressing?

No US government has ever fully implemented the constitution, right? Shall we hold a match to the constitution and Declaration of Independence? Is that a logical addendum to your argument?

As for political parties, your posts show how you consistently conflate them with communism.

Edited by volgadon
Link to comment

Pure communism is naive, or must be administered by force.

Pure capitalism is heartless.

Pure socialism is so unweildy as to be unworkable on a large scale.

They are simply economic systems and are not inherently evil nor beneficent.

These are my admittedly simiplistic thoughts on the major econonomic systems. As I have never read nor heard about any government being solely one of these I find a dogmatic adherence to any one of them to be a bit pedestrian. Our government, or any government, will always be a conglomeration using parts of all of them.

Link to comment

No US government has ever fully implemented the constitution, right? Shall we hold a match to the constitution and Declaration of Independence? Is that a logical addendum to your argument?

As for political parties, your posts show how you consistently conflate them with communism.

Again, Volgadon, I mentioned *no* political party. Yes, I do think there are certain parties aligned with the same kind of thinking as the explicitly mentioned Communist Party but where did I mention political parties? I've only spoken in concepts and ideas. Valentius is the one who explicitly mentioned political parties, sir. There's no denying that.

Also, did you catch the part of my #12 post highlighted in bold below?

Correction: Law of Consecration = Serving the Lord thy God. That's antithical to how communism has been practiced.

Why would I emphasize *how* communism "has been practiced"? That would be because I'm fully aware that communist countries have never followed Marx in the strictest sense but to me that makes no difference. The logical end of Karl Marx is war, death, chaos, disparity, and that his ideas will never work based on exactly his own argument: that man is selfish. The Founding Fathers embraced man's nature of selfishness and divided government power. That way one group should selfishly guard its power against other groups from taking it. Unlike Marx, the nation's founders did not seek to force man to change. Nor, unlike Marx, did they conceive and end to man changing his nature. Nor does the LDS Church force man to change, only God can do that.

If we are to apply your position that no nation has ever been communist because they have never practiced what Karl Marx advcated, to the fact that that the US Constitution has never been fully upheld would be to argue that we are, therefore, not a Constitutional Republic. That, sir, would be ludicrous.

Back to the Law of Consecration being communism, I would point out that the Law of Consecration is to "build up the kingdom of God on earth". When has communism advocated any such thing? When did Karl Marx ever come close to preaching God being the final end of communism? In communism, the community is the end game, not God.

(I still have not mentioned any political party. Can't say the same for someone else on this thread).

Edited by Darren10
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...