Posted on 01/28/2020 9:40:48 AM PST by Signalman
If recent polls are any indication, Sen. Bernie Sanders is surging in the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination. According to a CNN poll out this week, the Vermont independent has reached a statistical tie with Joe Biden for first place nationally. In New Hampshire, meanwhile, a WBUR survey shows the self-described democratic socialist with a 12-point lead. Polls vary, but Sanders is clearly winning over many Democratic primary voters.
At every stage in his adult life, Sanders has been an unabashed apologist for communism, an evil ideology with a body count of 100 million people dead in its wake. A cursory examination of this record should disqualify Sanders from public office:
While people such as my grandfather were languishing as political prisoners in Cuba, Sanders said that he was so “excited” about the island’s communist revolution that watching JFK get tough on Fidel Castro made him want to “puke.” In 1980, as most prominent democratic socialists criticized Iran’s taking of American hostages, Sanders joined a Trotskyist revolutionary party that defended the Islamic regime’s actions. When the United States was containing communism in Central America, Sanders flew to Nicaragua to lend credibility to the Sandinistas. The 78-year-old presidential candidate even honeymooned in the Soviet Union and came back full of praise for it. Some may not grasp how bizarre this was during the Cold War, but, at the time, it was almost unheard of to do such a thing. Despite his lifelong fascination with communism, not once did Sanders have the decency to meet Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, a renowned Soviet dissident who lived in Vermont.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Well Bernie supporters are going to have to make a decision on course of action when the hellary camp takes his nomination away a 2nd time...buy more popcorn
“Democratic” Socialism: you can vote your way in, but you have to shoot your way out.
—
yup
And what old Bernie the Red ISNT is a Democrat.
“Democratic Socialism is the same thing as Communism, achieved by a different path.”
Terms like “free enterprise” and “capitalism” don’t need the modifier “democratic”, because it’s automatically assumed. Putting “Democratic” and “Socialist” together defines a paradox, or an oxymoron, or a brief period in the descent to absolute slavery.
“The goal of socialism is communism’’. V. Lenin.
Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke?Funny enough, back then there were so-called “democratic socialists, which TPOC describes thus:
No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society.
In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity. …
— The Principles of Communism
(T)he third category (of socialists) consists of democratic socialists who favor some of the same measures the communists advocate, as described in Question 18; not as part of the transition to communism, however, but as measures which they believe will be sufficient to abolish the misery and evils of present-day society.In reality, of course, there is still no difference between the so-called democratic socialist and the Marxist because the endgame is socialism, rather than the undefined state of “communism” that presumes the nonexistence of the state and universal worldwide family-less, property-less, religion-less and nation-less communal living.
These democratic socialists are either proletarians who are not yet sufficiently clear about the conditions of the liberation of their class, or they are representatives of the petty bourgeoisie, a class which, prior to the achievement of democracy and the socialist measures to which it gives rise, has many interests in common with the proletariat.
It follows that, in moments of action, the communists will have to come to an understanding with these democratic socialists, and in general to follow as far as possible a common policy with them — provided that these socialists do not enter into the service of the ruling bourgeoisie and attack the communists.
It is clear that this form of cooperation in action does not exclude the discussion of differences. …
If Bernie is nominated, Trump needs to call him out and ask him how he intends to pay for all of his [Sanders'] clear ideas.
No, no paradox. Hence the difference between “democracy” and “republic”.
Woodrow Wilson saw democracy and socialism as “one and the same” actually, as did Marx and Engels who claimed that the communist revolution would set up “a democratic constitution” through which their imaginary “proletariat” would become the ruling class.
The smarmy, ill-informed, know-nothing know-it-alls that O’Keefe has shown to be part of Sanders’ campaign are a product of what passes for ‘higher’ education these days. Harvard has a >$40 billion endowment, yet you can find limousine Marxists around every corner, and this is not uncommon in most universities.
I would raise the voting age to 21, unless you have served in the military.
Bernie has the support of no people. Where in any place at any time has Bernie, by himself, spoke at a rally where he has anywhere near the crowds that Trump attracts at his rallies?
In 2016 didn’t Bernie had some decent sized rallies?
The certainly dwarfed Hellary Hootnannies!
Imagine thinking there was any functional, long-term difference between democracy and communism anywise.
If you’re thinking of the Washington Square Park one, that’s very easy to miscount. He lost the NY primary by 16 points.
that’s probably it
“Woodrow Wilson saw democracy and socialism as ‘one and the same’ actually, as did Marx and Engels who claimed that the communist revolution would set up ‘a democratic constitution’ through which their imaginary ‘proletariat’ would become the ruling class.”
I think the American idea of “government by the people” is meant to ensure that the individual can govern himself and his own affairs. When an American hears the word “democracy”, that’s what he thinks of, not a tyranny of The Collective.
Every Marxist claimed to be a Democrat. Hence, the German Democratic Republic, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, etc.
The polar opposite of our Constitution. Socialism/ Marxism simply paves the way for government to steam-roll over the rights of individuals . . . there is ALWAYS a reason to be made up for government deny you your rights under Marxism. The Constitution stands in the way now. Our Founding Fathers had this 100% correct.
A democratic socialist is a communist who hopes to fool the voters into electing him so he can then rule forever.
What a sad commentary on our country that this man is considered a legitimate candidate for anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.