Important and Exciting LENIN AppealPosted on 04/19/2003 12:03:08 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
No, of course they did not. What they liked is pleasant fantasy and illusion.
That is the key to understanding the conundrum of Marxism itself. The author makes a cascade of points that show that real nature is essentially laissez faire, red in tooth and claw. Were the adherents of fuzzy environmentalism OR Marxism fond of linear logic they would see the point instantly. In fact, they are not. What is common between these two groups is that their members prefer a mystical, make-believe world that is utopia on paper to the muddy, bloody business of real life. In the case of Marxism it stopped at Lenin who, in the business of actually running a government, concluded quite logically that in order for the system to work properly certain social classes needed to be liquidated, and resistant peoples relocated or disbanded, and he and Stalin merrily set out to do that very thing. That sort of activity didn't appear in either the Communist Manifesto or Capital; in those theoretical documents it was supposed to be a "natural" process, a "withering away" of the old world into new form. In the muddy, bloody business of actually ruling a state Lenin and Stalin found that process needed a little practical kick-start. Two decades and around 10 million deaths later the job still wasn't done, but hey, "you can't make an omelet without cracking a few eggs." Too bad the omelet itself never showed up.
So too with radical environmentalism. Nature where the lion lays down with the lamb simply doesn't work - the lions starve and the lambs overpopulate until they, too, starve. Wolves and deer do the same thing, as a number of householders are finding out in the Northeast, much to the detriment of their chewed-up gardens. The deer still starve regardless. And a certain hominid with no fur and no claws is perfectly subject to the same criteria. We aren't ruining nature, nor are we contrary to it - we are part of it, and in our absence nothing will change except that a new stasis will be found between lion, lamb, and dinner table.
You're not going to talk either set of true believers out of it. The radical enviromentalist will remain convinced that people are the ultimate unnatural destroyer even as he is being gobbled by a bear. The Marxist remained a believer even as he was being transported to gulag or firing squad. The only trick will be not letting the idiots drag you down with them.
Mentioning Elian yet again?
Elian went home with his family three years ago and some people cannot get past that, just as some cannot get past the fact Gore lost.
In case you have not noticed, 1) We were attacked on 9-11-01, 2) We bombed the crap out of Afghanistan and 3) We just liberated Iraq.
Welcome to the 21st Century.
9-11 woke the U.S.A up to the fact that some people in the world should be killed. Saddam Hussein was one of them. Fidel Castro is another. I am not going to comdemn one mass murderer dictator of a terrorist sponsor rogue state while making ignorant excuses for another one, like you have.
President Bush would not have illegally kidnapped Elian at gunpoint and given him over to the clutches of a mass murderer. It took a POS like Bill Clinton to do that. I am glad we have a Presient like George Bush and not a Communist sympathizer like Bill Clinton. Are you?
We will never forget Elian, and we will keep talking about him forever. You need to get over that.
I stand with George W. Bush and those who believe in freedom. You stand with Bill Clinton and Fidel Castro. You need to come to terms with that fact.
....and told to run naked through the wilderness, hunt down and eat prey, howl at the moon, etc, etc.
Why can't you admit to the fact since you don't live there you do not have any idea whatsoever what is going on with that boy, and just shut the hell up about it?
9-11 woke the U.S.A up to the fact that some people in the world should be killed. Saddam Hussein was one of them. Fidel Castro is another. I am not going to comdemn one mass murderer dictator of a terrorist sponsor rogue state while making ignorant excuses for another one, like you have.
Ah, here we go again. That repetitious, robotic, one-dimensional thinking. Castro, Castro, Castro, it's all about Castro.
May I remind you that when Juan Gonzalez and his family were all here in the US on a military base, they could have asked for asylum at any time. They did not. What we got was photos of a smiling and obviously happy Elian, and people like yourself making the ridiculous straw-grasping allegation the pictures were doctored.
President Bush would not have illegally kidnapped Elian at gunpoint and given him over to the clutches of a mass murderer.
Nobody was "illegally kidnapped." The RFH did not have a legal right to the child, and they were told to turn the child over. They refused to do so. So if anyone was breaking the law, m'dear, it was them.
Furthermore, Juan Gonzalez is not a mass murderer. No matter what you say, no matter what you think, no matter how you wish, hope, and pray, it will never change the fact this was a custody dispute between a child, his uncle and his biological father. Not Castro. Not Cuba. Not Clinton, or the USA either. This was an issue of parental rights, not politics.
We will never forget Elian, and we will keep talking about him forever. You need to get over that.
But then one may be inclined to ask if it is healthy to be obsessing over boys under the age of ten.
Almost all the public schools in the U.S. do not celebrate "Christmas" anymore. In fact, teachers cannot even utter the word. The PC police have changed the name of the holiday to "Winter Break" or "Winter Holiday". Of course, "Easter" is verboten as well.
Except for Juan was a hard-boiled, brainwashed Commie, who eas able to have some of the privileges of party membership (like a full stomach), and the overbearing sense in his psyche that if he fell from grace, he would perish. He's never experienced freedom, and he was never allowed a minute of it when he entered the U.S. totally controlled and confined to a military base.
This was an issue of parental rights, not politics.
Oh, so now you're a lawyer, eh?
It wasn't about politics - it was about freedom. And, how a little boy's mother sacrificed her own life so he could live free - and how stone-cold hearts could send a boy back to the gulag, and their apologists like yourself.
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.