English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39205

Take things away from us on behalf of the common good is that pure Marx ?

2007-08-18 18:16:35 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

17 answers

While I do think that site tries to paint her as a communist she is obviously a socialist. Lets see, what you own is better given to someone else and we are going to decide who gets what. Yeah, that's socialism if I have ever heard it. The problem with socialism is it works against human nature and reduces the ability to compete. Its not as bad as communism only because it does less of what it wants to do and that makes everyone equally. When you take away the incentive to produce profit and excel since your prosperity will be given to others your society is doomed to fail.

Below is a link to the Merriam Webster definition of socialism and please tell me this comment doesn't fit the first definition.

2007-08-18 19:45:33 · answer #1 · answered by Justin K 3 · 0 3

You clearly have a very warped view about what a Marxist is...
By that definition Robin Hood is a Marxist... Unfortunately if he lived at all, Robin Hood lived a thousand years prior to Marx...
That's called helping out the poor...

You should probably read up on Marxism...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism

2007-08-19 01:36:46 · answer #2 · answered by RATM 4 · 3 2

I am no fan of Hillary. However, the site appears to be a right wing opinion site. I don't doubt Hillary's ability to be bad for the country. I do consider the sources of links though.

2007-08-19 02:10:59 · answer #3 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 4 1

Disagree with Romare...today's liberal democratic presidential candidates are truly radicals, not the more 'moderate' democrats of our parents generation.
Also, there are a few conservative republicans running for office now that are more moderate than those of our parents generation.

Worldnetdaily is a 'good' source for news. The more research we do the better... on a candidate and their past to get a better sense of who they are.

2007-08-19 02:18:16 · answer #4 · answered by thankstohim1 2 · 0 2

First of all, the news piece is dated in June, so that's already been discussed on here months ago. Secondly, World Net Daily is hardly a reputable or objective source for political information, so I would like to suggest that you broaden your reading and research.

And lastly, perhaps you've noticed that when one phrase is taken out of a speech and out of context and given a spin by a political adversary, it usually comes out sounding very different from the way it did when it was originally said.

There are no Marxists in America anymore. Our political spectrum has shifted so far to the right compared to every other country that what we now call moderates used to be called right-wingers.

2007-08-19 01:27:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 5

Worldnetdaily is a right wing propaganda site. Nothing read there can be trusted to be true. Get your information from a more reliable source

2007-08-19 05:52:13 · answer #6 · answered by xg6 7 · 2 1

What this means is you dont know anything about politics, and want to avoid failures in this administration because you care more about george bush than you do about america.

Another girl trying to sound like she has a clue

2007-08-19 04:28:25 · answer #7 · answered by writersbIock2006 5 · 0 2

perhaps to some degree in an overall sense...

I mean... Republicans even want to take some tax money to provide a military, which would be for the common good...

there is some degree of Marxism in basically every nation...

it doesn't even say exactly what she wants to use it for in your little story... so it's a bit of an overexagerated point here to call it what most would consider "Marxism"

2007-08-19 01:23:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6 2

It takes a village is a good example and many more.

2007-08-19 08:38:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

As opposed from taking things away from the middle and lower classes to protect the wealthy elite's riches.

2007-08-19 01:35:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers