The assault on the first amendment (and the return of McCarthyism)

And openAI says...

Short answer: No, there has never been a society that actually followed Marx’s blueprint for communism in its full sense. What we’ve seen historically are attempts at “state socialism” or “party-led socialism,” but not communism as Marx described it. Let me break this down.

Why This Contrast Matters

Communism (Marxist sense): Has never been fully realized, so its harms come from failed implementations that twisted the theory.

Fascism: Has been fully realized multiple times, and each time it produced mass violence, oppression, and systemic destruction.

So yes: authoritarian fascism has existed, and wherever it has taken root, it has left devastation in its wake.

Fascism as Actually Implemented

Unlike communism, which has remained more of an unfulfilled ideal, fascism has been implemented in full authoritarian form:

Italy under Mussolini (1922–1943) – the original fascist regime.

Germany under Hitler (1933–1945) – Nazism is a fascist variant, with racial supremacy added to the core authoritarian-nationalist ideology.

Spain under Franco, Portugal under Salazar, and others – authoritarian regimes with fascist elements, even if not carbon copies.

Fascism is defined by:

Authoritarian state power (suppression of democracy).

Cult of leadership.

Extreme nationalism.

Suppression of dissent, unions, and opposition parties.

Often, militarism and expansionism.

The prompt was: Has Maxist communism ever been fully implemented in the history of the world, and has authoritarian style fascism ever been fully implemented?

I'm not arguing for it... I've said that now multiple times. I'm just pointing out the fact it's never been implemented. It hasn't. I've argued this for 30+ years, and it's always pretty much the same thing you've said. Oh yes it has... blah, blah, blah... no. It hasn't... not even close. Any actual scholar will tell you that.

Yes and even if you win you can get kicked in the a$$ by trump control agency afterwards ….
And you know he will try !!!

You say people gets banned for those things and yet it’s been flooded on internet everywhere for ever shrug .
Maybe you will see a distinction someday between private corporations and government actions .
The threat of trump in office is real censorship with government power , you get that ?

Bold is pretty funny after you guys complained because ABC fired someone.

Do you get that democrats censored infinitely more than republicans ever will? what part of that don't you get? i personally had at least 50 acquantainces banned on social media during covid.

Do you understand Kimmel is not censored? while people banned on social media had NO ****ING PLACE TO GO, the banning lists were cross shared by ALL social media because the FBI did that? and when some apps tried to exist without banning people apple and google store banned them?

Do you understand the extent of China-like censorship coordinated by the Biden admin that happened?

Yup... you guys have been brainwashed to say this for decades now.

The same way you call liberals communist for wanting government to handle things that the private industry can't handle effectively, like healthcare, etc... it's always very binary. It has to be all one thing or the other. It can never be both.

Believe me, I've heard this all a million times. There's nothing you or anyone in here is going to say that I haven't already heard before. They are old, uncreative, unimaginative, and untrue tropes. Communism has been implemented, liberals just say it hasn't because it didn't work. Blah, blah...

No... but you guys don't care about truth. That's a key component of fascism.

You got to love maga .

Yes trump said this but he was joking or he didn’t meant it .

Yes Kimmel didn’t explicitly said that but that was what he meant and it’s very serious , his never joking .

this is beyond ******ed. The bold literally would apply to Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong Un. The bold is just "authoritarian dictatorships", INCLUDING every single communist one ffs.

It's incredible you can cite this without feeling are you trying to scam people.

Here's another AI prompt:
Based on these traits... what parts did the soviet union implement, and which didn't they - Key traits of communism proper: Classless society (no workers vs. owners). Stateless society (no coercive state apparatus). Common ownership of the means of production, managed directly and democratically by the people. Distribution “from each according to ability, to each according to need.”

Bottom line

The Soviet Union achieved state ownership of production and the elimination of private capitalists, but it failed on every other Marxist criterion. It was socialist in name and aspiration, but in practice it became a form of state capitalism or bureaucratic collectivism, not the stateless, classless communism Marx envisioned.

But I know... AI is liberal. I think truth may have a liberal bias then.

Are u denying he got fired after what the US government agency said ?
Because he wasn’t suspended before government intervention…

Is social media the government?

You mean only Facebook and old twitter exist for social media ?

So if Biden was like China , trump is the worst ever in human history ?
What specifically law passed , legal actions s or executive order Biden did ?

Ok, Mao's China.

AI prompt:
based on these traits... what parts did Mao's China implement, and which didn't they - Key traits of communism proper: Classless society (no workers vs. owners). Stateless society (no coercive state apparatus). Common ownership of the means of production, managed directly and democratically by the people. Distribution “from each according to ability, to each according to need.”

Bottom line

Mao’s China went further than the USSR in trying to abolish old classes and experiment with radical collectivization, but it failed to meet Marx’s core traits. It was never classless, never stateless, never democratic in its economic management, and never able to distribute by need. Like the USSR, it remained state socialism with authoritarian control, not communism proper.

Which one would you like to do next? Maybe read some actual scholars on communism and it's history? I have.

Yes the methods are similar to all extreme regimes.
Whats define them it’s the ideology behind it .
Which is what distinguishes left and right .
How is this hard to understand??

Why are you falling into this false equivalency too?

The actual goal of communism is noble. It's unrealistic, and will likely never be achieved, but the goals are noble.

The goals of fascism, are not noble, but the exact opposite. They are intentionally about control, power, greed, and suppression.

Both extremes are not fruitful for society, but trying to say they are the same is absurd. Sorry. Even if we take this to actual left wing extremist that are here today... they tend to be people who are chained to trees to protect forest, or rioting to voice opposition to suppression and violence in their communities.

Right wing violence in this country is senseless. It has no moral purpose or goal. It's purely out of ignorance, bigotry and hate.

And to be 100% clear, I'm not saying violence is a solution to any of these problems. But there are differences of purpose and intention that do matter.

So if you don’t think Stalin , Mao and others were not communist,
How would you called them ?

Read the above that I posted bro... ask AI if you want to learn more. There are tons of books on this subject as well. I can recommend some if you want. But nobody who actually studies this stuff honestly would say they were.

"a party elite emerges so it's not communism" is , again, beyond insane. It's impossible to remove hierarchies in human societies. Physically impossible.

And "state capitalism isn't communism" is, again , beyond insane.

Also "communism means no state" is , lol. It's impossible to remove all entities from having power over people. Someone wil ALWAYS have violent power over people, there is no other possible setup.

If you aspire for a set of things that include literally impossible things, you can't claim you never tried it if you try all the possible things and the result is always disastrous, just because the literally impossible things can't be tried.

Otherwise fascists could just add "and energy is infinite and free" to their manifesto. So everytime they do everything which is actual fascism, it isn't real fascism because energy wasn't free.

You little marxist mother****ers play word games all of your miserable lives to hide the horrors that your ideas already caused to humanity (by far the worst set of ideas ever attempted in practice by humanity).

Enough

Your narrative is busted man. It's simply not true. And I know you've used it to justify this support for the fascism you desire. But the truth is, you just support violence. And I'm not a marxist or a socialist for that matter.... but whatever makes you feel better about yourself. I don't think either are realistic, at least not in my lifetime.

Mao's China, Stalin's Russia was about authoritarian's using the IDEA of communism and selling it to a broken class of people. But in reality, they had ZERO intention of ever implementing it. They just used it to gain power and achieve their authoritarian desires.

It's no more complicated than that... but I know. Truth has a liberal bias. I get it.

That's wholly inaccurate. It's a common notion and accepted as true, but it has it's roots in cold war propaganda. During the cold war, each side had an interest in labeling the Soviet Union as communist. The U.S. wanted the Soviet Union known as communist because communist was a curse word in America. Russia wanted to be known as communist because the associations with communism were overwhelmingly positive in their country. In truth, the Soviet Union never achieved communism or anything close to it.

Communism isn't "the state makes everything and you will all wear the same t-shirt". It just means you are going to vote on things in your workplace and excess money is going to be highly regulated and more reinvested into improving the lives of the people of the country instead of hoarded by whatever rat happens to be rat king of a given enterprise at a given time.

Since I've been alive, this has been sold and told to right-wingers as a fear tactic... don't even think about another system. This is the only one that can work. These have been tried elsewhere and failed miserably. Don't you even give it a second thought.

It's just a lazy label because most people don't want to think or understand things on their own.

The countries that have threaded the needle between private and collective ownership are coincidently the ones that have the happiest populations, most upward mobility, best education, best health and childcare and so on and so on.

Lies told as part of a crime are not protected by the first amendment.

You know this is BS. They settled with him because he is the most powerful man in the world and has the ability to make their lives hell and kill their businesses.

This is not true in the US. I believe it is in the UK (and I think many other European countries but I'm less sure about that) but in the US it's entirely at the judge's discretion whether the accuser has to pay the defendent's legal costs if they are found not guilty. It might be the case that a basic level of costs are often awarded but there's no guarantees and at the scale of the lawsuits Trump has been filing it's almost certain that they would be spending millions more than is likely to be awarded so even with a negligibly small chance of being found guilty settling for a figure in the millions can seem like the most sensible option.

Do you understand that was in the past, Biden will never be in charge of anything again? We're complaining about bad things actually happening now; even if something a million times worse happened in the past, that is no excuse or reason to let the bad things happen now.

Whattaboutism is all you are doing.

For the defamation thing, these can last years and there’s a huge amount of risk, and they can still be reputationally damaging even if you beat the defamation charges, and they know Trump has an infinite money glitch from his supporters. Plus he might croak before the case is settled and his estate might drop it and you are left holding the bag on the legal fees.

Now you can argue that it wasn’t nothing because the NYT got their case dismissed, but even ones that don’t get dismissed right away can take a long time.

Plus I don’t know if every state awards legal fees.

As for the accusations, I have to look into them before I make any comment about it, but my gut is to never trust a word Jim Jordan says.

This "what is really Communism" debate BS is older than any of us, and completely worthless. No, true communism has never existed on any significant scale (and probably never could work).
Yes, every time there has been an attempt to implement communism (or at least a claim of that), it has not worked (see above) and has resulted in totalitarian states with terrible economic results.

Now can we just drop it on both sides? It's completely irrelevant to this discussion or any other. No more than a tiny fraction of Americans support either "true communism" or the attempted authoritarian kind.

Liberals are not Communists, any one who says so is a liar or an idiot. Same for Democrats. Same for people who believe there should be universal healthcare or higher taxes on the rich, or more assistance given to the poor. Those types of measures are aspects of Social Democracies like the ones in northern Europe, which have been shown to work very well for many years, without leading to authoritarianism. They may slightly slow growth and reduce productivity. The benefits vs the drawbacks of Democratic Socialism can be weighed by voters, the way they generally are in Europe. It is clear that in recent decades (for at least 40 years), any benefits of higher growth and higher productivity have been concentrated in the hands of a very small minority of Americans, so that possible benefit provides no gain to the vast majority.