3 ms·

> Communism did not resolve the Great Depression Not be belabor an outrageously belabored point, but no one is talking about anything that anyone ever called "

> Communism did not resolve the Great Depression Not be belabor an outrageously belabored point, but no one is talking about anything that anyone ever called "communism". We're talking about things like progressive income taxation, medicare, social security, welfare, the WPA, etc... The people who implemented those policies weren't communists. Communists themselves were spending the whole time working toward revolution in a proletarian struggle against the governments who did that stuff. I know it's en vogue in some modern circles to rebrand New Deal economics as "communism". But... sorry, it's really fucking stupid. Don't do that. This site strives for a higher level of discourse.

brigandish 5y ago
> but no one is talking about anything that anyone ever called "communism" The quote at the top of this thread that I responded to is: > I know, I know, communism, yada yada. But that's the solution, and it's trivially proven to work > sorry, it's really fucking stupid. Don't do that. This site strives for a higher level of discourse. I would say that what's actually fucking stupid and what should not be done is to: a) lie b) be rude c) be a hypocrite I don't know if Dang watches these threads and I'm generally against hellbanning, yet somehow I wouldn't be bothered for a second if he hellbanned you.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- newacct583 5y ago
  For the record, that was my quote. And it was sarcasm, intended (clearly, I thought) to head off the kind of ridiculous digression about terminology that you dove right into anyway. So you'll have to forgive my profanity. But I stand by it: the idea that Roosevelt et. al. and the mid-century western flirtation with social welfare and redistributable economics constitutes "communism" is really fucking stupid.
  - brigandish 5y ago
    > For the record, that was my quote. And it was sarcasm We can all see they are your words, some of us bother to read the posts written by others. > So you'll have to forgive my profanity I don't have to and I don't forgive you, you've shown no ounce of contrition nor compromise, nor any insight worth providing you toleration. > But I stand by it: the idea that Roosevelt et. al. and the mid-century western flirtation with social welfare and redistributable economics constitutes "communism" is really fucking stupid. May I remind you of my recorded words: > Communism did not resolve the Great Depression anywhere, let alone the United States If you can't see the implication that Roosevelt "et. al."[sic] actions were hence, not communism, then perhaps you should wonder who is being dense here.

brigandish 5y ago

> but no one is talking about anything that anyone ever called "communism" The quote at the top of this thread that I responded to is: > I know, I know, communism, yada yada. But that's the solution, and it's trivially proven to work > sorry, it's really fucking stupid. Don't do that. This site strives for a higher level of discourse. I would say that what's actually fucking stupid and what should not be done is to: a) lie b) be rude c) be a hypocrite I don't know if Dang watches these threads and I'm generally against hellbanning, yet somehow I wouldn't be bothered for a second if he hellbanned you.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
newacct583 5y ago
For the record, that was my quote. And it was sarcasm, intended (clearly, I thought) to head off the kind of ridiculous digression about terminology that you dove right into anyway. So you'll have to forgive my profanity. But I stand by it: the idea that Roosevelt et. al. and the mid-century western flirtation with social welfare and redistributable economics constitutes "communism" is really fucking stupid.
- brigandish 5y ago
  > For the record, that was my quote. And it was sarcasm We can all see they are your words, some of us bother to read the posts written by others. > So you'll have to forgive my profanity I don't have to and I don't forgive you, you've shown no ounce of contrition nor compromise, nor any insight worth providing you toleration. > But I stand by it: the idea that Roosevelt et. al. and the mid-century western flirtation with social welfare and redistributable economics constitutes "communism" is really fucking stupid. May I remind you of my recorded words: > Communism did not resolve the Great Depression anywhere, let alone the United States If you can't see the implication that Roosevelt "et. al."[sic] actions were hence, not communism, then perhaps you should wonder who is being dense here.