Hey keep your terms straight. We are authoritarian and statist, but we are most definitely not socialist. The reason for the first two traits is largely to reign in the influence of socialism.
My ass. Fiscally Liberal and Socially Conservative is what a Neo-Con is. You'll make the rich RICHER on the backs of the people that build this country.
Really good video.People are arguing over Rep and Dem. What they need to be focused on is finding a constitutional candidate. Ron Paul is that man.I wish you luck and hope myself to get in the race.Feel free to com with me on such ideas.I want to know more about your true feelings and ideas on liberty.Maybe if we see eye to eye we could work together.Thanks and yes I am a Ron Paul rep.
I enjoyed this video & I agree with it nearly 100%. But you make no argument against socialism, only "extreme socialism". If I didn't already agree with you I would wedge my argument into the differences between socialism and your examples of 'extreme socialism' by focusing on those socialistic nations which appear at least moderately sucessful.
what i said: neocons are not socialist, not capitalist. A mix of both: socialism with the rich, and capitalism only for the rich. I would say Neocons want feudalism.
That to which you refer, is not capitalism, either. That's just what the government's schools trained us to call it. Under capitalism, the government would not have the ability to grant privilege to any groups. The economic system which allows such interference in the market is mercantilism or more recently referred to as corporatism. These allow for private ownership of the means of production but under government control. It's just a different name for socialism.
it is not. it is feudalism. If you check the definitions of feudalism. You will see that it is the one which matches the neo-cons.
Socialism is aimed at helping the lower class. Socialism for the rich is using the same idea but favoring the rich. For example, when u use taxpayer's money to buy weapons and bail out big corporation.
Capitalism on its own also fails, for example in the health industry. It has many advantages I like. Socialism also fails, because it causes big gov.
Probably, you will ask me why do i say that Capitalism fails in the health industry. Three main issues:
1. Catastrophic diseases/illness.
2. The pharmaceutical companies need control to check whether or not they are selling the right medicines. Companies tend to cheat in order to reduce their costs of production.
3. It is clear, in practice, countries with "universal health care" have been more sucessful: Cuba, Finland, Sweden, GB, France. However, this universal health care is not the one proposed by Clinton.
For example, even in the best days of capitalism in the states, Cuba leaded the field of medicine.
In order to keep a balanced opinion, I would also say that Capitalism is the only way to improve production, and then efficiently creating wealth. I like that. Limited gov. is necessary.
*capitalism is great. Latin America has been capitalist in the 20th century. Today Latin America has skycrappers, the world's best Universities, a GDP per capita greater than the US, and many illegal American immigrants are flocking to Latin America to get wages of 500 dollars an hours instead of measly 10 in the Stats.
Bollocks. Do try and understand that democratic socialism and the neocons fascism have about as much in common as I do with you. There has been a rash of this confusion-propaganda recently. Do some independent research will you?
Bull. No difference between democratic socialism and fascism. Many socialists have even adopted the fascist corporate state as their model. Just because you don't wear a uniform does not mean you have nothing in common with the fascists, you do: statism.
Now you demonstrate your ignorance of the distinctions between socialism and communism. Also simply claiming to be "socialist" doesn't mean a thing. Hitler and Pol Pot called themselves "socialists". About as simplistic an argument as saying all yanks who believe in democracy are democrats.
The distinction between socialism and communism are inconsequential to someone who prefers liberty as it makes no difference to him if his freedom is taken by "the people" or by the corporatist state. A person with that world view only sees liberty and tyranny. The distinctions between the means by which his liberty is taken are--wait for it--inconsequential/irrelevant/meaningless.
People like you are going to argue liberal/conservative democrat/republican for your entire life while your liberty is taken regardless of who is in office or which ideology is in ascendancy.
Wrong again! I have no political allegiances. My point was about the blurring of ideological borders. And they are NOT inconsequential. Only a yank who's never been anywhere else would come up with this. Just wishful thinking on the part of a simpleton.
No - Fascists! - Socialist: Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. Fascist: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
tell me everything that you know about predatory capitalism! and then tell me how many excess deaths occur every year in the united states because of our failed healthcare system.
It is hard to believe socialist or (capitalism)feudalism works in their essence, both has proved they are fatal to society, history suggests to take what is best from both and compromise
Theres no such thing as prosperity for all. That would be a Utopia, something that never has and never will exist. Capitalism gives individuals the freedom and vehicle to choose whether or not they wish to attain prosperity as they see it.
I disagree. Neocons are not socialist, it is socialist for the rich. Thats why neocons look as conservatives. Because, their socialism is for the rich, looking as capitalism. But, they use the most convinient parts of both sides.
This retard over simplifies socialism like crazy. Socialism doesn't mean the economy is controlled by the government. It means that the economy is controlled by THE PEOPLE, a collective community. Now, it COULD be the government. But it doesn't have to be. There are other ways that the people can control the means of production other than the state.
He actually means communism. Socialism is at the other end the spectrum where left-liberals create a welfare state in order to equalize the gap between rich and poor. Communism is the opposite, it enhances the gap between rich and poor in order to maintain a stable social structure of elites who control a destitute population dependent upon the central government.
Socialism & communism refer to the same basic premise: society / community. Although community is important, the danger is in who will direct the society. Individuals ought to direct and be responsible for their own families and selves. A society made up of responsible individuals is a healthy society. A country made up of healthy smaller societies is a peaceful and prosperous country.
I hope all you guys realize that socialists throughout the world would never have anything to do with neither the Democrats nor Republics! None of them are Socialists, not even a little..
With weather weapons that cause millions of innocent deaths...China, Myanmar etc....to War of destabilization; starvation as a tool, aid as a tool and physical and biological war...
There is no time in the history of our world that is more pressing than now...
You are simply copying the tactics of Reagan, nothing new here. Reagan attacked what he called 'socialist' conservatives under Nixon, just as you do 'socialist' neo-cons. He practiced on radio and newspaper articles as you do with youtube. Remind me, how did Reagan's presidential career end again? Problem is, you aren't going to able to convince many people your dogmatic, socially conservative neo-cons are somehow progressive.
I'm relatively young (24) and to be honest I've never been able to see any legitimate difference between republicans and democrats. It's too bad there isn't someone to vote for who truly wants small government.
Also, calling the former USSR and China "socialist" is misleading, they were oligarchies. There were clearly the haves and have-nots depending on your position in government.
True socialists are more like the current Scandinavian countries where the State provides for more basic services (infrastructure, education, healthcare).
Neocons have strong ties to religion, primarily protestantism because that is their power base. They know that protestants have an obsession with the 2nd coming of christ and thus have an obsession with the holy land of israel, so the neocons use it to their advantage by unfilching support for the israeli state.
"Neoconservatism emphasizes foreign policy as the paramount responsibility of government, maintaining that America's role as the world's sole superpower is indispensable to establishing and maintaining global order."
I hope you make it to Congress. We need more folks in there which share the same values as Ron Paul. I live in the Gold Country (Amador County), and want to see true AMERICAN values upheld in our Government once again. Things are so messed up, it sometimes becomes very depressing. But, I know freedom can be restored, starting with putting HONEST people in office!. My vote will be with you... Please don't let us down. I believe you'll try your best.
and the MA Sup. Ct Decision?? Lets not forget that in the US Constitution and in many state constitutions it is the legislatures that are supposed to make laws, not Courts!!
And this doesn't even get into the moral position that homosexuality is immoral, as well as those in it have been decieved mentally therefore are in practcallity insane?!
It isn't very "conservative" to deny personal responsiblity in the Choice to have sex, therefore abortion leaning women (and the men who sire their children) have the responsiblity to take care of their progeny, they don't have the right to deny "life and liberty" to their offspring!! As for so called 'gay rights' (AKA marriage)- who do you think is bringing these issues into the political realm..It isn't social conserveratives, It's the courts, or have you forgotten Lawrence v. Texas?
In the legal community as being an aweful ruling as it basically made up a "right to choose" through 'prenumbra and emenations' that do not exists in our Constitution!?! To top this off our very own T. Jefferson wrote in the Declaration (though I know this doesn't have any real effect on our laws) tthat all men are created equal and endowed with certain unalienable rights including "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". I think 'all men' means ALL men- including the unborn..? To top
All men, not including women or blacks of Jefferson's time. Hard to pinpoint how Jefferson felt about an unborn fetus. It does live parasitically on the mother, but did Jeff that as a human it was endowed with the same rights as an individual? Hard to say.
The one point where I would take objection to your platform is your pick on social conservatism as not conservative-or as you put it "new-con": This isn't true. So called social conservatism is NOT inconsistent with the conservative position, freedom and the Constitution. Or do I have to remind you that the COURTS were the ones that introduced (illigally-judically activist courts) social issues into the public square, NOT SOCIAL Conservatives. Roe v. Wade is widely reguarded in the legal comm
The Communist government of Cuba likes Michael Moore, so much, they sent Che's daughter to lead him around by the pignose to the hospitals for foreigners. Even statist governments are in the business of making money. Search the videos on you tube.
Actually this guy is very smart. The ideas of Socialism are not American ideas at all. Remember that the Nazi where Socialists and we all know that they did. I know that many Socialists think that they are helping people. What they are in fact doing is taking from one person to give to another. That is not freedom at all. If I work hard to some money to take care of myself and those I love I will choose who gets that money not the government.
Oh really? Can you quote me the date when the US decided to consider US natural resources a collectively owned resource and putting out in many times foreigners from exploiting them?
The USSR is not a good example of the possibilities of socialism. the russian economy was empty when the revolution occured, therefore it was hard for the russians to support a socialist system. Furthermore, when the USSR became a totalitarian state it started making the conditions in the country unlivable.
I do not care what they are called or what their ideas are.All I know is they have hurt this country and have led it down a bad path.We need to get back to traditional American ideals.We have gon to extremes and it is time to recenter ourselves.
Agreed. Use the Constitution as the center and go from there. Any candidate should be measured on how their ideals, past, present and future adhere to it; a Constitutional Rating Score. What do you think?
First step is to ask what happened. Second is to decide what to do about it. I've realized the Constitution was chipped apart piece by piece by Fabian Socialists because change all at once was too disruptive. What I've decided is to fix it back piece by piece. Always vote for the more Constitutional candidate and ignore the pretty words spoken by two-faced liars.
It is time to watch dog and hold reps accountable.Petition for change through bills and laws.Elect new reps-but we need to clean up the election process first.Alot has to be done to reverse the tide of gov by the few at the expense of freedom and prosperity for the many.
Actually not. The West propped up the Soviet Union 7 times up until Reagan said no, and built up the US military. The USSR built up their military in response and it bust them out. Face it, communism sucks because its... statist ideas come from unqualified leaders who got into power by blood on the hands.
Nice video. It would be wonderful to see true conservative replublicans in government again. It's a shame Neocons have taken over the party. They're the reason I've never voted for a Rebublican the 16 years I've been old enough to vote.
this is not the bush presidentecy at stake this time we have been attacked and there are people who still want to attack us and our freedom.We can not anymore years of what is is? Vote for a secure America .
Strong video by the way. A very clear explanation of how the two major parties have merged ideologically while trying to maintain their traditional image. The media supports this illusion by framing each party as having distinctly different beliefs and labeling anyone outside this narrow spectrum as an "extremist","Kook", etc. We must be made to think that any view other than their view is objectively insane.
USA is not capitalist, its an empire using that ideology pretending some democracy, as USSR did with comunism...When Ron paul says that hell eliminate de Federal Reserve, thats a pure socialist act, because the PEOPLE will take control of the money...take care of the misleading ideas of the society...
The main difference I see between communism and fascism is this. While they both use tyranny to contol the masses, communism uses government exclusively (the people being the state and the state being the people), while fascists outsource some of their evil to privately owned companies. But both share the same goal. And both patently refute individual liberty. The rights of the individual represents the core of our Constitutional principles.
one example of false comunism and that the world have been using as an example is the ex USSR. USSR never have been comunist, but an Empire. Actually, theres never been comunism in the world democraticly.The ideas of capitalism and comunism are perfect, its the Imperialism of human beings that mess up the system...
I see your point, but what allows that imperialistic ideal to take hold (IMO) is not that we get it wrong each time, but rather our human nature always creates a self-interested higherarchy (i.e. we always place our self-interests before group-interests). While "togetherness" sounds desirable, as a political system, it creates tyranny. Pluralism creates some voilence, but at least it is isolated to individual conflicts. I think that's the best we can hope for.
And also our human nature is defined by great solidarity, and by the darwinian evolution view, thats what keeps us going towards. Theres others human behaviors that are anti-imperialist. The only point here at least to make, is that the Imperial propaganda has always tried to demolish comunism, when in reality its only the other extreme of the admidistrive view of this world..
im a socialist by conviction and heart but im not agaist capitalism, i mean, the real capitalism. That one who cares about the other, and in loyal concurrancy theres no law bypassed and humans putted apart. When Ron paul for exemple says he will eliminate the Federal Reserve to let the citizen take more control of their posesion, its a socialist behavior. Because if the Federeal Reserve is Private, if its eliminated, it becomes public.
Actually, Fascism is defined by Mussolini (a fairly prominent fascist in his day) as corporatism. The combining of state and corporate power. Militarism and nationalism are biproducts of the root problem of the state enforcing corporate regulations.
NJ has a great example of this. If you don't pay your car insurance, they notify the state and you have your license suspended. This is fascism at its core.
Well thought out speech, and I believe more and more people are openning their eyes to what you speak of.
They are using fabricated capitalist "failures" to use state intervention in business. The Fed dropping interest rates, causing inflation is an attempt to start an economic crises, and get the Americans to welcome statist socialist policies with open arms.
Socialist governments hold power over their people. Here in America, We The People are supposed to hold power over the government. I say supposed to because, in case you hadn't noticed, we don't anymore.
Take our country back, research and vote for poeple that support our constitution.
Regulating homosexuality and abortion is not the same thing. Homosexuality involves consenting adults. Abortion involves a silent, but living, and innocent child.
GREAT VIDEO -- The neo cons are why I am not voting GOP for the first time in my 60 years. see the 14 BBC produced series on youtube or read the book Neo Cons: THe Invasion of the Party Snatcher by Victor Gold. search neo cons on web or youtube. This is actually real I am sorry to say.
you are correct and what a shame that we are to stupid to ever elect him. we are dominated by the news that think he is a joke. Tells you something about the news trying to run us instead of just report.
I would have thought the same thing I am a republican and didn't believe it. Just do a search on Google to get started looking at it. you might not like Pat Buchanan but he is a real conserative - look at that he says. If you know what they are then it becomes easy to see. I'm not a kook that usually buys into this kind of crap.
Micheal Moore is such a hack. He is a cookie cutter liberal that diverts our attention away from the real cause of our problems. He should be talking about the federal reserve or our monetary system instead, now that is real corruption.
Socialism is having government do more than its necessary tasks ie. protecting liberty. If Michael Moore supports government health care or government education or any government program that is not dedicated to protecting liberty, then he is a socialist.
DUH. You need to do the research. The neocons ARE "converted" left wing liberals from the Democrat party. They were "illuminated" in the 1970s. Back then, they realized that they were actually neo (new) conservatives. Republicans? This is there own profession of the event. They labled themselves as neocons.
Neocons are more radical than socialists. Look up the neocon "in-crowd" and then look up their political origins. They were Trotskyites. Yes, they have some x-conservative toadies following them around, but they're in it for the crumbs.
this is the most idiotic video I've ever seen, but if you are right, then America is a socialist utopia, so that would destroy your position, ha... what a moron you are...
Anybody who has seen any of your videos knows that you have the mental capacity of an eight year old. For you to call this video idiotic is just, well, idiotic. You literally come across as a Down's Syndrome case in your videos.
Wow, that's pretty weak. This guy just explained why Neocons are socialists and all you can say is that they are not. The truth is that the forerunners of neoconservatives were ex-Democratic liberals who moved away from the left during the 1960s. But I would actually argue that the neocons are closer to Communism than socialism.
What I don't understand is how we didn't see this. Maybe you do I didn't. After discovering it you find that it answers why the GOP is no longer acting like the party that cares about being responible for controlling expenditures. It is a small group to -- very small.
You proved your point: Neocons are Socialists. Socialism is Illustrated Despotism: commanding inferior subjects for their own good.
But it is essential to categorize Neocons as Deficit Spending Socialists, because their "conservative" alibi is to reject taxes while borrowing like there's no tomorrow to pay for the Neocon 1ST PRIORITY: Foreign Policy.
Neocon = Socialist = Internationalist = The rule of the United Nations
If all you have to say is HAHAHA, look no further: there is an ocean for rent in your brain.
Socialism started with Comte de Saint-Simon, founder of Christian socialism and author of "Nouveau Christianisme" (1825). Marxism then brought a left-wing, secularized, Socialism.
Neocons are Judeo-Christians socialists. Because in modern days, it is a reaction to left-wing socialism, poorly educated people cannot think of Neocons as socialists ("conservative ex-liberals").
...wow. Sir, or Maam, NeoCons are not Judeo-Christian Socialists. Given that NeoCons are reactionary, but not against left wing Socialism. It is a reaction against Keynsian style Capitalism. If you think I am uneducated, then I pity you. Have a great day:)
The author of this video is not correct. The Republican Party has always, always been for political centralization, and has never, ever been for "free enterprise." The GOP was founded on protectionism, high tariffs, and centralization. There's nothing "neo" about that con. When exactly were the Republicans ever like Mr. Turbolizard describes them?
Neoconservatism comes from a stronger ideological version of the big government policies that have always been apart of America. Irving Kristol, neoconservatism's founder, was a Trotskyist who made a hard turn to the right because they were supportive of Israel and Trotskyists were pacifists. From this, I think it can be said that any "ism" taken to the point of ideological agenda is HARMFUL to society.
Actually the neocons stemmed from the Democratic New Left movement during the 1960s. They eventually moved to the right but brought a lot of ideas from the left like more centralized government and use of foreign intervention. The neocons eventually pushed the conservatives out of the republican party when Ronald Reagan was president.
That's what the party was named after, although they've never really lived up to their name much. Lincoln was a pretty lousy Republican, and he was the first Republican president.
Using the word "republic" to describe a system of government is absurd. Rome was a "republic" -- Roman Republic. USSR was a Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICs. And now US is a republic. These 3 examples are alike in no way. The most this word means is an independent sovereign state. But that hardly describes an internal political system. And if the word does not describe the political system, how can it describe "the system of government".
Americans confuse communism w/socialism. China & the former USSR are communist/socialist. NL is a socialist democracy. Socialism is 'working' quite a bit better than our capitalism. Both r democratic. Rampant privatization leaves us @ the whim of unelectable CEOs & boards of directors. Americans need to educate themselves as to the difference in socialism & capitalism. Only communism precludes democracy.
Both are "democratic"? What, what, what (stage directions: spills coffee)? Umm, no. "Communist" nations (which really have/had socialist economies) do/did not have free elections. They are not democratic. They are totalitarian. They just happen to occasionally have mildly-intrusive dictators. But that is always the dictatorship's choice - not a result of the way the system is set up.
docmoriarti: You misread my posting. 'NL' is The Netherlands. The Netherlands is a democracy and it is socialist. My point is, many Americans assume socialism is communism.
I think you confuse socialism with a capitalism with strong socialist tendencies. Socialism is a centrally planned and ran economy. As long as there is private enterprise, it is capitalist. It's a sliding scale of sorts. The more government gets involved, the more socialist it is. NL is a capitalist but highly regulated.
I take it as a given that there are no pure democracies and no country exercises pure anything. That 'said,' NL is a socialist democracy. You've gone from misreading my posting and having an issue w/ that & when I correct you, having to find an issue w/ something else to save face. Just do some research instead of being argumentative just for its sake, or name-calling. NL = socialist democracy. Pick a fight w/ someone who doesn't go by facts. ;-)
I haven't misread your post. I can't address everything it said due to my msg limited to 500 chars. In a socialist democracy elected government would control and own ALL enterprise. That's just not the case in NL. Their economy is largely privately owned, albeit highly regulated. I am not trying to save face here. I just disagree with you on facts.
Socialism COULD possibly work, but not with this corrupt government.
Socialism only works with accountability to the voters, and this government has absolutely no accountability at all. We just voted in the Democrats to take us out of Iraq. Are we out of Iraq yet? That was a year ago.
Yes, she is. Rupert Murdoc is financial backing Hillary now because he knows that no one is going to vote for the Republican Party due to the damage that Bush has done. Hillary believes that America should excerise its power on the world stage but she says it in a kinder way. That basically makes her a neo-conservative. The Democrats are going to become the "new Republicans", just you wait and see.
Aren't neocons Facists?
sandythebear 1 year ago
The title sold me. ITS TRUE PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!
fluff125 2 years ago
Comment removed
JMehrman 2 years ago
actually, it is proof that labels fool almost everyone.
I find it hilarious how Obama can do so many things like Bush, yet he is supposed to be politically opposite
Elasaltaculos 2 years ago
Hey keep your terms straight. We are authoritarian and statist, but we are most definitely not socialist. The reason for the first two traits is largely to reign in the influence of socialism.
JohananRaatz 2 years ago
My ass. Fiscally Liberal and Socially Conservative is what a Neo-Con is. You'll make the rich RICHER on the backs of the people that build this country.
Neo-Cons are no friends to Liberty or the Law
leftrightliars 8 months ago
@leftrightliars Oh I see you are somehow under the delusion that libertarian = conservative.
JohananRaatz 8 months ago
Depends on what faction of the Libertarian party you're speaking of. Some are conservative, some are not. Which are you talking about?
leftrightliars 8 months ago
you sir, are awesome. big props from cali
jakejakewhat 3 years ago
"The liberty of a pregnant woman."
The life and liberty of the child.
OgeronimonominoregO 3 years ago
Socialism and Neoconservatism are FAR different.
Look up Libertarian Socialism, they're not your average socialist and I think they've got it perfect.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
i agree, think i'm in love..lol...
dellsprospects2 3 years ago
Really good video.People are arguing over Rep and Dem. What they need to be focused on is finding a constitutional candidate. Ron Paul is that man.I wish you luck and hope myself to get in the race.Feel free to com with me on such ideas.I want to know more about your true feelings and ideas on liberty.Maybe if we see eye to eye we could work together.Thanks and yes I am a Ron Paul rep.
Edgrot 3 years ago
For the sake of balance, it's imperative that the Democrats get back in. Enough Republicans for a while.
a1mint 3 years ago
I enjoyed this video & I agree with it nearly 100%. But you make no argument against socialism, only "extreme socialism". If I didn't already agree with you I would wedge my argument into the differences between socialism and your examples of 'extreme socialism' by focusing on those socialistic nations which appear at least moderately sucessful.
norriscj 3 years ago
what i said: neocons are not socialist, not capitalist. A mix of both: socialism with the rich, and capitalism only for the rich. I would say Neocons want feudalism.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
That to which you refer, is not capitalism, either. That's just what the government's schools trained us to call it. Under capitalism, the government would not have the ability to grant privilege to any groups. The economic system which allows such interference in the market is mercantilism or more recently referred to as corporatism. These allow for private ownership of the means of production but under government control. It's just a different name for socialism.
BryanMorton 3 years ago
it is not. it is feudalism. If you check the definitions of feudalism. You will see that it is the one which matches the neo-cons.
Socialism is aimed at helping the lower class. Socialism for the rich is using the same idea but favoring the rich. For example, when u use taxpayer's money to buy weapons and bail out big corporation.
Capitalism on its own also fails, for example in the health industry. It has many advantages I like. Socialism also fails, because it causes big gov.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
Probably, you will ask me why do i say that Capitalism fails in the health industry. Three main issues:
1. Catastrophic diseases/illness.
2. The pharmaceutical companies need control to check whether or not they are selling the right medicines. Companies tend to cheat in order to reduce their costs of production.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
3. It is clear, in practice, countries with "universal health care" have been more sucessful: Cuba, Finland, Sweden, GB, France. However, this universal health care is not the one proposed by Clinton.
For example, even in the best days of capitalism in the states, Cuba leaded the field of medicine.
In order to keep a balanced opinion, I would also say that Capitalism is the only way to improve production, and then efficiently creating wealth. I like that. Limited gov. is necessary.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
*capitalism is great. Latin America has been capitalist in the 20th century. Today Latin America has skycrappers, the world's best Universities, a GDP per capita greater than the US, and many illegal American immigrants are flocking to Latin America to get wages of 500 dollars an hours instead of measly 10 in the Stats.
jenna2001 3 years ago
Bollocks. Do try and understand that democratic socialism and the neocons fascism have about as much in common as I do with you. There has been a rash of this confusion-propaganda recently. Do some independent research will you?
hornetobiker 3 years ago
Bull. No difference between democratic socialism and fascism. Many socialists have even adopted the fascist corporate state as their model. Just because you don't wear a uniform does not mean you have nothing in common with the fascists, you do: statism.
Stronghurst 3 years ago
Now you demonstrate your ignorance of the distinctions between socialism and communism. Also simply claiming to be "socialist" doesn't mean a thing. Hitler and Pol Pot called themselves "socialists". About as simplistic an argument as saying all yanks who believe in democracy are democrats.
hornetobiker 3 years ago
There is often not ignorance of the distinction, but simply the knowledge that those distinctions are inconsequential.
ls1z28chris 3 years ago
IOW you mean you're an alternate history ideologue too?
hornetobiker 3 years ago
Alternate history? WTF are you talking about?
The distinction between socialism and communism are inconsequential to someone who prefers liberty as it makes no difference to him if his freedom is taken by "the people" or by the corporatist state. A person with that world view only sees liberty and tyranny. The distinctions between the means by which his liberty is taken are--wait for it--inconsequential/irrelevant/meaningless.
ls1z28chris 3 years ago
People like you are going to argue liberal/conservative democrat/republican for your entire life while your liberty is taken regardless of who is in office or which ideology is in ascendancy.
ls1z28chris 3 years ago
Wrong again! I have no political allegiances. My point was about the blurring of ideological borders. And they are NOT inconsequential. Only a yank who's never been anywhere else would come up with this. Just wishful thinking on the part of a simpleton.
hornetobiker 3 years ago
I didn't accuse you of having political allegiances, old man. I simply said you're living under a false paradigm. Thank you for proving my point.
ls1z28chris 3 years ago
You obviously can't read or remember what you have posted yourself wee man. Sad.
hornetobiker 3 years ago
No - Fascists! - Socialist: Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. Fascist: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
sirwizardoflight 3 years ago
tell me everything that you know about predatory capitalism! and then tell me how many excess deaths occur every year in the united states because of our failed healthcare system.
maunaowakea777 3 years ago
It is hard to believe socialist or (capitalism)feudalism works in their essence, both has proved they are fatal to society, history suggests to take what is best from both and compromise
henrydaVII 3 years ago
Please change that tie. It's blinding
WonderWomanUS 3 years ago
"taxpayer subsidized corporatists"
pointyfingers 3 years ago
btw, Capitalism has also failed to give prosperity to all. Both fail in different ways. The main problem is human nature, and the lack of honesty.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
Theres no such thing as prosperity for all. That would be a Utopia, something that never has and never will exist. Capitalism gives individuals the freedom and vehicle to choose whether or not they wish to attain prosperity as they see it.
JesseKantstopolis 3 years ago 2
I disagree. Neocons are not socialist, it is socialist for the rich. Thats why neocons look as conservatives. Because, their socialism is for the rich, looking as capitalism. But, they use the most convinient parts of both sides.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
I would say, exactly, that neocons promotes feudalism.
agfigueroaa 3 years ago
I'm happy to see Congress has men/women who think like this guy, Theodor Terbolizard (funny name). We need more like him.
katydig 3 years ago
This retard over simplifies socialism like crazy. Socialism doesn't mean the economy is controlled by the government. It means that the economy is controlled by THE PEOPLE, a collective community. Now, it COULD be the government. But it doesn't have to be. There are other ways that the people can control the means of production other than the state.
rocker935 3 years ago
He actually means communism. Socialism is at the other end the spectrum where left-liberals create a welfare state in order to equalize the gap between rich and poor. Communism is the opposite, it enhances the gap between rich and poor in order to maintain a stable social structure of elites who control a destitute population dependent upon the central government.
monkeyman1140 3 years ago
Socialism & communism refer to the same basic premise: society / community. Although community is important, the danger is in who will direct the society. Individuals ought to direct and be responsible for their own families and selves. A society made up of responsible individuals is a healthy society. A country made up of healthy smaller societies is a peaceful and prosperous country.
katydig 3 years ago
I hope all you guys realize that socialists throughout the world would never have anything to do with neither the Democrats nor Republics! None of them are Socialists, not even a little..
semireversed 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
They also are for redrawing the map of Aisa..
With weather weapons that cause millions of innocent deaths...China, Myanmar etc....to War of destabilization; starvation as a tool, aid as a tool and physical and biological war...
There is no time in the history of our world that is more pressing than now...
Petition our government for a change in policy!!!
StopGeneralizing2day 3 years ago
This guy has no idea what he's talking about.
Fascism is more like it.
tonidi21 3 years ago 2
You are simply copying the tactics of Reagan, nothing new here. Reagan attacked what he called 'socialist' conservatives under Nixon, just as you do 'socialist' neo-cons. He practiced on radio and newspaper articles as you do with youtube. Remind me, how did Reagan's presidential career end again? Problem is, you aren't going to able to convince many people your dogmatic, socially conservative neo-cons are somehow progressive.
CodyWDodd 3 years ago
Turbo Lizard is awesome. Everybody vote for the Turbo Lizard.
responderer 3 years ago
Great video...it's no surprise why we hear a lot of GOPers now praising FDR, who was America's first dictator.
AresXIV 3 years ago
"Our Enemy The State"
-Alfred Jay Nock.
"The Road To Serfdom"
-F.A. Hayek
The enemy is not the party it is the totalitarian state whether R or D.
usmcvet66 3 years ago
Don't forget Ayn Rand!
The person who was most deserving of the Nobel Prize in Literature but was not recognized.
This is the same cohort that awards Peace Prizes to environmentalists. Figures...
highonhayek 3 years ago
The Road to Serfdom is a must read.
I'm relatively young (24) and to be honest I've never been able to see any legitimate difference between republicans and democrats. It's too bad there isn't someone to vote for who truly wants small government.
aerix949 3 years ago
Neo-conservatives: privatization, class separation, strong ties to religion
Socialists: municipalization, class convergence, weak if not nonexistent ties to religion
Please stop confusing socialism for fascism. You do yourself and your fans a disservice.
Willravel 3 years ago
I concur. Neocons are fascists not socialists.
Also, calling the former USSR and China "socialist" is misleading, they were oligarchies. There were clearly the haves and have-nots depending on your position in government.
True socialists are more like the current Scandinavian countries where the State provides for more basic services (infrastructure, education, healthcare).
lohphat 3 years ago 3
I think that neocons have weaker ties to religion than you are suggesting.
highonhayek 3 years ago
Neocons have strong ties to religion, primarily protestantism because that is their power base. They know that protestants have an obsession with the 2nd coming of christ and thus have an obsession with the holy land of israel, so the neocons use it to their advantage by unfilching support for the israeli state.
monkeyman1140 3 years ago
Socialists? Wouldn't it be nice...
RMSCosta 3 years ago
"Neoconservatism emphasizes foreign policy as the paramount responsibility of government, maintaining that America's role as the world's sole superpower is indispensable to establishing and maintaining global order."
RMSCosta 3 years ago
Dear Mr. Terbolizard,
I hope you make it to Congress. We need more folks in there which share the same values as Ron Paul. I live in the Gold Country (Amador County), and want to see true AMERICAN values upheld in our Government once again. Things are so messed up, it sometimes becomes very depressing. But, I know freedom can be restored, starting with putting HONEST people in office!. My vote will be with you... Please don't let us down. I believe you'll try your best.
DalevisLives 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You're insane! Please stop making videos and get a fucking life!
FloresDeLaPrimavera 3 years ago
Neocons are Trotskyites who gave up on real socialism long ago.
BTW, Michael Moore has never claimed to be a socialist.
And Russia is still a poor country!
westphalianprinz 3 years ago
Neo cons are in both camps of Democrats and Republicans.
Obamatons, anybody here!
chewbaca1989 3 years ago
and the MA Sup. Ct Decision?? Lets not forget that in the US Constitution and in many state constitutions it is the legislatures that are supposed to make laws, not Courts!!
And this doesn't even get into the moral position that homosexuality is immoral, as well as those in it have been decieved mentally therefore are in practcallity insane?!
JSenator06 3 years ago
It isn't very "conservative" to deny personal responsiblity in the Choice to have sex, therefore abortion leaning women (and the men who sire their children) have the responsiblity to take care of their progeny, they don't have the right to deny "life and liberty" to their offspring!! As for so called 'gay rights' (AKA marriage)- who do you think is bringing these issues into the political realm..It isn't social conserveratives, It's the courts, or have you forgotten Lawrence v. Texas?
JSenator06 3 years ago
In the legal community as being an aweful ruling as it basically made up a "right to choose" through 'prenumbra and emenations' that do not exists in our Constitution!?! To top this off our very own T. Jefferson wrote in the Declaration (though I know this doesn't have any real effect on our laws) tthat all men are created equal and endowed with certain unalienable rights including "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". I think 'all men' means ALL men- including the unborn..? To top
JSenator06 3 years ago
All men, not including women or blacks of Jefferson's time. Hard to pinpoint how Jefferson felt about an unborn fetus. It does live parasitically on the mother, but did Jeff that as a human it was endowed with the same rights as an individual? Hard to say.
KenC411 3 years ago
The one point where I would take objection to your platform is your pick on social conservatism as not conservative-or as you put it "new-con": This isn't true. So called social conservatism is NOT inconsistent with the conservative position, freedom and the Constitution. Or do I have to remind you that the COURTS were the ones that introduced (illigally-judically activist courts) social issues into the public square, NOT SOCIAL Conservatives. Roe v. Wade is widely reguarded in the legal comm
JSenator06 3 years ago
Who likes Michael Moore?
terbocongress 4 years ago
The Communist government of Cuba likes Michael Moore, so much, they sent Che's daughter to lead him around by the pignose to the hospitals for foreigners. Even statist governments are in the business of making money. Search the videos on you tube.
mykol13v 4 years ago
@terbocongress Not me.
AresCassell 6 months ago
Paleocons and libertarians: "America first! America first!"
Neocons: "Israel first! Israel first!"
AresCassell 6 months ago
too funny you like michael moore! don't you find a 300 lb man lecturing america on the evils of excess slightly hypocritical?
azsunrise7 4 years ago
Actually this guy is very smart. The ideas of Socialism are not American ideas at all. Remember that the Nazi where Socialists and we all know that they did. I know that many Socialists think that they are helping people. What they are in fact doing is taking from one person to give to another. That is not freedom at all. If I work hard to some money to take care of myself and those I love I will choose who gets that money not the government.
freedomwv 4 years ago 2
Oh really? Can you quote me the date when the US decided to consider US natural resources a collectively owned resource and putting out in many times foreigners from exploiting them?
TheCZMan 3 years ago
this guy is evil
playawitdalex 4 years ago
You Are Ignorant!!
gtrgyro333 4 years ago
Evil is stealing people's hard-earned money by force or coercion to distribute to people who never wanted to earn it, yet benefit.
mykol13v 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LJ even has an entire community dedicated to you!
terbolizard_gpx on live journal
Erishkagal 4 years ago
The USSR is not a good example of the possibilities of socialism. the russian economy was empty when the revolution occured, therefore it was hard for the russians to support a socialist system. Furthermore, when the USSR became a totalitarian state it started making the conditions in the country unlivable.
TheAnarchistAvenger 4 years ago
Dog poop is still poop if it comes from a poodle or a bulldog.
Conservative>
Neo-Conservative>
Libertarian>
Democrat>
Fascist>
Marxist>
Communist>
mykol13v 4 years ago
Socialist!!!
gtrgyro333 4 years ago
I do not care what they are called or what their ideas are.All I know is they have hurt this country and have led it down a bad path.We need to get back to traditional American ideals.We have gon to extremes and it is time to recenter ourselves.
cincinnatusnow 4 years ago 6
Agreed. Use the Constitution as the center and go from there. Any candidate should be measured on how their ideals, past, present and future adhere to it; a Constitutional Rating Score. What do you think?
mykol13v 4 years ago
The constitution needs to be restored first though.
cincinnatusnow 4 years ago
First step is to ask what happened. Second is to decide what to do about it. I've realized the Constitution was chipped apart piece by piece by Fabian Socialists because change all at once was too disruptive. What I've decided is to fix it back piece by piece. Always vote for the more Constitutional candidate and ignore the pretty words spoken by two-faced liars.
mykol13v 3 years ago
It is time to watch dog and hold reps accountable.Petition for change through bills and laws.Elect new reps-but we need to clean up the election process first.Alot has to be done to reverse the tide of gov by the few at the expense of freedom and prosperity for the many.
cincinnatusnow 3 years ago
Funny, because if it weren't for the Western world, the Soviet Union would still exist in all it's glory.
cadabraa 4 years ago
Actually not. The West propped up the Soviet Union 7 times up until Reagan said no, and built up the US military. The USSR built up their military in response and it bust them out. Face it, communism sucks because its... statist ideas come from unqualified leaders who got into power by blood on the hands.
mykol13v 4 years ago
Nice video. It would be wonderful to see true conservative replublicans in government again. It's a shame Neocons have taken over the party. They're the reason I've never voted for a Rebublican the 16 years I've been old enough to vote.
ScaperSteph 4 years ago 5
But where did he get that shirt from?
Its straight out of the 1930's, maybe hes good friends with Dr Who.
Danni4815162342 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
go Ron Paul!
Sebosky1 4 years ago
this is not the bush presidentecy at stake this time we have been attacked and there are people who still want to attack us and our freedom.We can not anymore years of what is is? Vote for a secure America .
crabjunkie2 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please vote in this AOL poll at: news(dot)aol(dot)com/political-machine/2007/12/21/straw-poll -dec-21-jan-4/
It seems you cannot get counted more than once on this one. Of course RP is winning. Please vote if you have not already.
Thanks
LORDOFWARS8 4 years ago
Strong video by the way. A very clear explanation of how the two major parties have merged ideologically while trying to maintain their traditional image. The media supports this illusion by framing each party as having distinctly different beliefs and labeling anyone outside this narrow spectrum as an "extremist","Kook", etc. We must be made to think that any view other than their view is objectively insane.
PositiveEdge 4 years ago
USA is not capitalist, its an empire using that ideology pretending some democracy, as USSR did with comunism...When Ron paul says that hell eliminate de Federal Reserve, thats a pure socialist act, because the PEOPLE will take control of the money...take care of the misleading ideas of the society...
Sebosky1 4 years ago
Agreed!
Danni4815162342 4 years ago
The main difference I see between communism and fascism is this. While they both use tyranny to contol the masses, communism uses government exclusively (the people being the state and the state being the people), while fascists outsource some of their evil to privately owned companies. But both share the same goal. And both patently refute individual liberty. The rights of the individual represents the core of our Constitutional principles.
PositiveEdge 4 years ago
one example of false comunism and that the world have been using as an example is the ex USSR. USSR never have been comunist, but an Empire. Actually, theres never been comunism in the world democraticly.The ideas of capitalism and comunism are perfect, its the Imperialism of human beings that mess up the system...
Sebosky1 4 years ago
I see your point, but what allows that imperialistic ideal to take hold (IMO) is not that we get it wrong each time, but rather our human nature always creates a self-interested higherarchy (i.e. we always place our self-interests before group-interests). While "togetherness" sounds desirable, as a political system, it creates tyranny. Pluralism creates some voilence, but at least it is isolated to individual conflicts. I think that's the best we can hope for.
PositiveEdge 4 years ago
And also our human nature is defined by great solidarity, and by the darwinian evolution view, thats what keeps us going towards. Theres others human behaviors that are anti-imperialist. The only point here at least to make, is that the Imperial propaganda has always tried to demolish comunism, when in reality its only the other extreme of the admidistrive view of this world..
Sebosky1 4 years ago
im a socialist by conviction and heart but im not agaist capitalism, i mean, the real capitalism. That one who cares about the other, and in loyal concurrancy theres no law bypassed and humans putted apart. When Ron paul for exemple says he will eliminate the Federal Reserve to let the citizen take more control of their posesion, its a socialist behavior. Because if the Federeal Reserve is Private, if its eliminated, it becomes public.
Sebosky1 4 years ago
I say Hillary clinton is fascist and communist and socialist and capitalist and anything that can be bad to go along with it.
jimmyphack 4 years ago
Fascism is a centralized state basing itself upon ultra-militarism and ultra-nationalism, unconstrained by the rule of law.
The Bushites are proto-fascists, not quite there but paving the way... They chip, chip, chip away at the rule of law.
Your slogan of neocons = socialists is factually inaccurate.
carrite 4 years ago 2
Actually, Fascism is defined by Mussolini (a fairly prominent fascist in his day) as corporatism. The combining of state and corporate power. Militarism and nationalism are biproducts of the root problem of the state enforcing corporate regulations.
NJ has a great example of this. If you don't pay your car insurance, they notify the state and you have your license suspended. This is fascism at its core.
joeyc117 4 years ago 2
Look beyond labels
grengerx 4 years ago
They are fascist , not socialists. You are wrong.
darliegoddess 4 years ago 2
Uhh, okay. I'm not entirely an anti-revisionist and I try to be non-sectarian, so I'll just pretend that I'm okay with that.
(hey, at least you didn't say "state-capitalist". *shudders*)
Cosplay2003 4 years ago
Same crap, Statism should be the label
grengerx 4 years ago
Isn't it true that the government bureaucracy in capitalist Russia today is a lot bigger than it ever had been throughout the Soviet era?
Cosplay2003 4 years ago
Well thought out speech, and I believe more and more people are openning their eyes to what you speak of.
They are using fabricated capitalist "failures" to use state intervention in business. The Fed dropping interest rates, causing inflation is an attempt to start an economic crises, and get the Americans to welcome statist socialist policies with open arms.
Freethought42 4 years ago
Socialist governments hold power over their people. Here in America, We The People are supposed to hold power over the government. I say supposed to because, in case you hadn't noticed, we don't anymore.
Take our country back, research and vote for poeple that support our constitution.
hammmeggs 4 years ago
They are Trotskyite fabian socialists.
WolverineInk 4 years ago
Micheal Moore is so fat. He should share all his fat like he wants the government to force people to share their money.lol
KaneFenton4Freedom 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch my video EXPOSING BILL KRISTOL THE SCUMBAG who called Ron Paul Anti-American !!!
just by clicking my name!
or just copy paste this youtube link[remove spaces]
youtube . com / watch?v=oWfeQ0i0TvI
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
well put, thanks
enotdetcelfer 4 years ago
if you think homosexual agenda is't communist then you need to get a brain.
Bigjuicybuck 4 years ago
Hang all the neocon pigs!
PGAJAMIE411 4 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch my video EXPOSING BILL KRISTOL THE SCUMBAG who called Ron Paul Anti-American !!!
just by clicking my name!
or just copy paste this youtube link[remove spaces]
youtube . com / watch?v=oWfeQ0i0TvI
VoteYourConsience 4 years ago
Regulating homosexuality and abortion is not the same thing. Homosexuality involves consenting adults. Abortion involves a silent, but living, and innocent child.
bammbamm12 4 years ago
truth my friend
PGAJAMIE411 4 years ago
GREAT VIDEO -- The neo cons are why I am not voting GOP for the first time in my 60 years. see the 14 BBC produced series on youtube or read the book Neo Cons: THe Invasion of the Party Snatcher by Victor Gold. search neo cons on web or youtube. This is actually real I am sorry to say.
Cuffsmaster 4 years ago
Look up Ron Paul, only good Republican left.
croat88 4 years ago
you are correct and what a shame that we are to stupid to ever elect him. we are dominated by the news that think he is a joke. Tells you something about the news trying to run us instead of just report.
Cuffsmaster 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Neocons are socialists...stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Michael Moore is a socialist?
Geez, you need to go to college or do some reading...
DreamOfTurtles 4 years ago
I would have thought the same thing I am a republican and didn't believe it. Just do a search on Google to get started looking at it. you might not like Pat Buchanan but he is a real conserative - look at that he says. If you know what they are then it becomes easy to see. I'm not a kook that usually buys into this kind of crap.
Cuffsmaster 4 years ago
Micheal Moore is such a hack. He is a cookie cutter liberal that diverts our attention away from the real cause of our problems. He should be talking about the federal reserve or our monetary system instead, now that is real corruption.
croat88 4 years ago
Socialism is having government do more than its necessary tasks ie. protecting liberty. If Michael Moore supports government health care or government education or any government program that is not dedicated to protecting liberty, then he is a socialist.
kulza23 4 years ago
DUH. You need to do the research. The neocons ARE "converted" left wing liberals from the Democrat party. They were "illuminated" in the 1970s. Back then, they realized that they were actually neo (new) conservatives. Republicans? This is there own profession of the event. They labled themselves as neocons.
Do alittle bit of research yourself.
PGAJAMIE411 4 years ago 2
Neocons are more radical than socialists. Look up the neocon "in-crowd" and then look up their political origins. They were Trotskyites. Yes, they have some x-conservative toadies following them around, but they're in it for the crumbs.
bammbamm12 4 years ago
bobbyusbombs.
Since Bush has shit support from his own party AND this country, what else would you call his decision making?
He is the "decider". So was Stalin. So was Hitler. He may not be a mass murderer but still, doesn't play well with others.
klovesk 4 years ago
this is the most idiotic video I've ever seen, but if you are right, then America is a socialist utopia, so that would destroy your position, ha... what a moron you are...
bobbyusbombs 4 years ago
bobbyusbombs,
Anybody who has seen any of your videos knows that you have the mental capacity of an eight year old. For you to call this video idiotic is just, well, idiotic. You literally come across as a Down's Syndrome case in your videos.
Freethought42 4 years ago 2
I don't think you did your research on Socialism because Neo-Cons are clearly fascist and capitalists and that is in opposition of Socialism.
wickedninja8599 4 years ago
Wow, that's pretty weak. This guy just explained why Neocons are socialists and all you can say is that they are not. The truth is that the forerunners of neoconservatives were ex-Democratic liberals who moved away from the left during the 1960s. But I would actually argue that the neocons are closer to Communism than socialism.
croat88 4 years ago 2
it all feeds into each other.
corporatism (FASCIST CAPITALISM) IS socialism
the only difference between them is how control comes about.
In Socialist/Communist states, the movement is top-down, with the Gov't seizing the economy
In Fascist/Corporatist States, the movement is bottom-up, with the corporations that control the economy seizing control of the government
The big thing to remember is that the end effect is the same, so it doesn't matter what we call it
SJSR45 4 years ago
What I don't understand is how we didn't see this. Maybe you do I didn't. After discovering it you find that it answers why the GOP is no longer acting like the party that cares about being responible for controlling expenditures. It is a small group to -- very small.
Cuffsmaster 4 years ago
The Neo-Con movement was started by a Bolshevik Communist named Irving Kristol, father of FOX news contributor William Kristol.
Freethought42 4 years ago
Kristol & Kagan helped FRANK GAFFNEY, Huckabee's advisor, FOUND PNAC & Kristol attends Bilderberg conferences.
blahinhawaii 4 years ago
funny though< he"s right about neocons
DaveDepraved 4 years ago
try looking up the diff between socialism and communism terboidiot_ i don"t hate you>>>
DaveDepraved 4 years ago
misinfo in first minute: socialists do not believe in centralized government> this guy is a hack>
DaveDepraved 4 years ago
RON PAUL 2008! RON PAUL 2008! ronpaul2008(dot)com
georgio316 4 years ago
Terbo,
You proved your point: Neocons are Socialists. Socialism is Illustrated Despotism: commanding inferior subjects for their own good.
But it is essential to categorize Neocons as Deficit Spending Socialists, because their "conservative" alibi is to reject taxes while borrowing like there's no tomorrow to pay for the Neocon 1ST PRIORITY: Foreign Policy.
Neocon = Socialist = Internationalist = The rule of the United Nations
jaralero 4 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
If you think that neo-cons are socialists, then I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell to you.
chromelemon 4 years ago
If all you have to say is HAHAHA, look no further: there is an ocean for rent in your brain.
Socialism started with Comte de Saint-Simon, founder of Christian socialism and author of "Nouveau Christianisme" (1825). Marxism then brought a left-wing, secularized, Socialism.
Neocons are Judeo-Christians socialists. Because in modern days, it is a reaction to left-wing socialism, poorly educated people cannot think of Neocons as socialists ("conservative ex-liberals").
jaralero 4 years ago
...wow. Sir, or Maam, NeoCons are not Judeo-Christian Socialists. Given that NeoCons are reactionary, but not against left wing Socialism. It is a reaction against Keynsian style Capitalism. If you think I am uneducated, then I pity you. Have a great day:)
chromelemon 4 years ago
terrorists plain and simple
2QBUFF 4 years ago
Support this guy, the corp. candidates get $money by blinking, honest guys like this need our support.
clinthoody 4 years ago 2
you explained it very well
bullsfan239712 4 years ago
You speak the truth.
jammasterjayfan 4 years ago
YES!!!
I wish i could get this through peoples heads
MainSourceNo1 4 years ago
Join the revolution! RonPaul2008dotcom
chucklestoomuch 4 years ago 3
The author of this video is not correct. The Republican Party has always, always been for political centralization, and has never, ever been for "free enterprise." The GOP was founded on protectionism, high tariffs, and centralization. There's nothing "neo" about that con. When exactly were the Republicans ever like Mr. Turbolizard describes them?
undercoveranarchist 4 years ago
Neoconservatism comes from a stronger ideological version of the big government policies that have always been apart of America. Irving Kristol, neoconservatism's founder, was a Trotskyist who made a hard turn to the right because they were supportive of Israel and Trotskyists were pacifists. From this, I think it can be said that any "ism" taken to the point of ideological agenda is HARMFUL to society.
thejobloshow 4 years ago
Actually the neocons stemmed from the Democratic New Left movement during the 1960s. They eventually moved to the right but brought a lot of ideas from the left like more centralized government and use of foreign intervention. The neocons eventually pushed the conservatives out of the republican party when Ronald Reagan was president.
croat88 4 years ago
Look up "Republicanism" in Wikipedia.
That's what the party was named after, although they've never really lived up to their name much. Lincoln was a pretty lousy Republican, and he was the first Republican president.
fuzzywzhe 4 years ago
So, an unborn baby is not an individual?
joshybear7 4 years ago
Sound as a bell.
Takezou07 4 years ago
Go TED!
cody745 4 years ago
It's funny when I see all these socialists talking. America is a republic, not a democracy, nor is it ran by socialists--yet.
If people don't liek it, tehnt hats tough. It's America: a republic.
JackNeedles 4 years ago
Using the word "republic" to describe a system of government is absurd. Rome was a "republic" -- Roman Republic. USSR was a Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICs. And now US is a republic. These 3 examples are alike in no way. The most this word means is an independent sovereign state. But that hardly describes an internal political system. And if the word does not describe the political system, how can it describe "the system of government".
docmoriarti 4 years ago
Americans confuse communism w/socialism. China & the former USSR are communist/socialist. NL is a socialist democracy. Socialism is 'working' quite a bit better than our capitalism. Both r democratic. Rampant privatization leaves us @ the whim of unelectable CEOs & boards of directors. Americans need to educate themselves as to the difference in socialism & capitalism. Only communism precludes democracy.
edbrown100 4 years ago
Both are "democratic"? What, what, what (stage directions: spills coffee)? Umm, no. "Communist" nations (which really have/had socialist economies) do/did not have free elections. They are not democratic. They are totalitarian. They just happen to occasionally have mildly-intrusive dictators. But that is always the dictatorship's choice - not a result of the way the system is set up.
docmoriarti 4 years ago
docmoriarti: You misread my posting. 'NL' is The Netherlands. The Netherlands is a democracy and it is socialist. My point is, many Americans assume socialism is communism.
edbrown100 4 years ago
I think you confuse socialism with a capitalism with strong socialist tendencies. Socialism is a centrally planned and ran economy. As long as there is private enterprise, it is capitalist. It's a sliding scale of sorts. The more government gets involved, the more socialist it is. NL is a capitalist but highly regulated.
docmoriarti 4 years ago
I take it as a given that there are no pure democracies and no country exercises pure anything. That 'said,' NL is a socialist democracy. You've gone from misreading my posting and having an issue w/ that & when I correct you, having to find an issue w/ something else to save face. Just do some research instead of being argumentative just for its sake, or name-calling. NL = socialist democracy. Pick a fight w/ someone who doesn't go by facts. ;-)
edbrown100 4 years ago
I haven't misread your post. I can't address everything it said due to my msg limited to 500 chars. In a socialist democracy elected government would control and own ALL enterprise. That's just not the case in NL. Their economy is largely privately owned, albeit highly regulated. I am not trying to save face here. I just disagree with you on facts.
docmoriarti 4 years ago
> Socialism is 'working' quite a bit better than
> our capitalism.
Socialism COULD possibly work, but not with this corrupt government.
Socialism only works with accountability to the voters, and this government has absolutely no accountability at all. We just voted in the Democrats to take us out of Iraq. Are we out of Iraq yet? That was a year ago.
fuzzywzhe 4 years ago
There has never been a socialist government that wasn't overrun with corruption.
The best tool to fight against corruption is to let every citizen have a say in political decision making.
Unfortunately with the invention of the TV, manipulating the minds of the average citizen has become all to easy.
Freethought42 4 years ago
> There has never been a socialist government
> that wasn't overrun with corruption.
I don't know if that is true, I do know it only works in very small governments, of say, less than 100 people.
fuzzywzhe 4 years ago
That sounds about right.
Freethought42 4 years ago
hahahhahahah. what a joke. get a brains moron!
wwwPNACATTACKcom 4 years ago
So according to your logic, Hillary Clinton is a Neo-Con?
eyewrenchee 4 years ago
Yes, she is. Rupert Murdoc is financial backing Hillary now because he knows that no one is going to vote for the Republican Party due to the damage that Bush has done. Hillary believes that America should excerise its power on the world stage but she says it in a kinder way. That basically makes her a neo-conservative. The Democrats are going to become the "new Republicans", just you wait and see.
croat88 4 years ago