If there is one thing I hate in the world it is Communism

Communist leaders in the world showed us that Hitler was a learner when it comes to murder of the citizens in the countries they governed. In the period Stalin and Mao governed their countries the death to l of inncent people murdered by the Communists were -

1. In Russia - 52 million
2. In China - 75 million.

Ho did millions die in he first instance. In Stalinist schools children was taught to ahte their parents and report to the teachers that they must report to them any sign that the parents made that could be regarded a being critical of Government and reven if the parents complain about food shortages and the children mentioned it in school - it as the death sentence for both parents,

When Khrushchev took over the leadership he famously declared that the USA would be destroyed from within and that a War would not be needed, Most people thought it was ridiculous - but it became the official policy of both the USSR and China,

So the program was to take over control of Education of the children in the USA both on school level and college level. The Policy in the end paid dividence and the Teachers Union bcame the backbone of Communism in the USA, Another means was to infiltrate the Democratic Party through taking over the local party administration organzation of the USA and much of the processes were funded by George Soros. The key was to get into the Party structure and ensure tthat leftists beame the leadership of the Party esecially to promote Communist and Marxist believes to become candidates of the Party in elections.

Since 2008 the whole pneective of the DP change and Krushchev's ideals lead to takeover of the Party from within. Candidates were eleced whose main aim was to introduce Marxism in the USA. The Party bcame in every election more lelftist and in many ways more corrupt,

By 2014 the Party's plants at University level and within the Federal Cicil service took over the Federal Government administration and running of the Unions like the Teachers Unions, . He was instrumental to establish two subsidiaries of the Demcoratic Party to attain two objectives in the USA through intmidation and violence, namely BLM and Antifa whose main obhectives were -

1. to keep the Black voters in the USA inner cities loyal to the Demcratic Party; and
2. to promote Marxism on College level through apointment of Marcists as professors at Universities,

The idea was that if people becomes unhappy with the policiess of the Government the two organizations were to attain their objectives through violence. The result was the deadly violence and riots in 2020 and the subsequintt College violent anti-semitism in the USA, The DP became a party whose main objectove was to destroy Democracy in the USA internally and create a situation where the Party rule the country indefinitely. The Party on local level started campaigns to defund the Police and create a violent envionment where oppressive meassures would be needed. Part of th e program was to get control of the Justice Department, the FBI and CIA under control of the DP and use it gainst opponents,

Part of the program was to remain in the Demcratic Party but gain control of the Party internally, A group calling themselves "Democratic Socialists" became a major component of the DP and in fact form a caucus group in the House and Senate, Sanders became an Independent Senator - but caucus with the Democratic Party, Sanders was from his youth a supporter of Communism and when he got married in 1976 he went to Russia for his honeymoon. He supportred Catro all-out and also Mao while they ruled in Cuba and China ,

While Biden was president in name the links between Communist leadeship in the Party became clearer, Harriis husband was the legal representative of the Chinse Government in the USA and their other apparachic was Walz who actively promoted socialist idology in the USA,

The sitation for the Democratic Party became seriosuly problematic when Trunmp beame president and the route they followed became routine. They oranized violent protests throughout the USA and instilled hatred of people opposed to them and they also promorfed anti-semitism. In the past the Democrats claim they were center-leftists - now the ultra-leftist comprise of 145 House members and about half of the Senators,

For me the final strew was the election pf Mandani - an open Communist - as the D P candidate in the mayiral eelction to be held in November this year, If the city can elect a very real Communist as their candidate in New York for Mayor that is the end fo the road of their hope for survival as a Party promoting and supporting Demcoracy in the USA.

The threat against Democracy worldwide is now the USA Demcoratic Party/

,

You simple fool...

It makes no difference whether the system is communist, capitalist, socialist, monarchist, or otherwise—if a small group controls the vast majority of the wealth, they ultimately wield the power in society. This is merely another form of authoritarianism.

It is neither left-wing nor right-wing, particularly when those in power represent both ends of the spectrum—at least from a social standpoint.

Systems can be analysed not only through an economic lens but also politically and socially.

Those who fixate solely on economic ideology—arguing over labels like capitalism versus socialism—often miss the broader truth: concentration of power, regardless of its origin, inevitably erodes democratic principles and public agency.

What matters is not the ideological branding of the system, but who holds the levers of influence—over policy, information, labour, and opportunity. Whether it’s a corporate boardroom, a party elite, or a royal court, when decision-making is centralised and accountability diluted, the result is functionally the same: inequality codified, dissent marginalised, and the public reduced to spectators.

True progress cannot be measured solely by GDP or party affiliation. It must be judged by the distribution of power, the openness of institutions, and the real freedom individuals have to shape their own lives.

Authoritarianism wears many masks—and wealth, when unchecked, is one of its most enduring disguises.

SB

As per normal you missed the point. In both Germany and Russia under Nazi or Comunist dictatorship respectively they were supported by capitalists in both the two countries concerned - in Gemany most of the support came from internal sources - but in both countries American captalists also played major roles, so they do influece poltical control over parties

In te USA the major funders of the Democratc Party were the billionaires- but the qiestion is what do they get in return/ A typical example is what happened in the parties concerned. Under Biden Cabinet members got their instructions ftom Soros and Gates and reported directly to tem on issues such as Open Borders and Law and Order (Soros) and Energy, the Green policy, Health and Agriculture to Gates,

In the case of Trump Musk wants to take iver cotol of Government and Trump would have nothing of it and a rathe public spat happened, So the real situation is that in the case of the Democrats control rests with the ultra-rich in total - in the case of the Republican Party it is not the case, Trump also took action against the Armaments and Pharma sectors and that shw that power rests with the elected representatives of the people,

In reality the Capialists controll the Democrats through funding and in elections they promised the people the sky and does the exact opposite, The DP's main objective is total control oe the country for decades to come. and for that the capitallists contributionm is over he emdia they own and nribery and corruption. The otehr part is the media are also partially throughs haeholding controlling the media come rom China,

Ths situation is that the Democratic Party is under total cpnmtrol of the Billionairs - in the case of the Republican Party the controll is limited. Every promise Trump made to the voters are being implemented - whether the funders like it or not, He cut diown medicine prices by as much as 50% - which hit the Pharma bilionaires and epecially Gates hard in the pocket,

So your idea is a collection of garbage statements. In real Democracoe the moarchs really has no power - they are there to get support for the vulneraable in society and most does more work in that regard than politicians do.

In the case of the USA - the DP is under contrl of the Billionaures and they do not mind what the pubic policies are as long as they control the situation totally through thei media sidekicks, The do like the situation in China and other dictatorships wher they can control the rulers and they actively control what is really happening. So giving the USA into a Communist dictorship is OK as long as they can control the leadership - but in some countries like Venezuela they lost control and that is why the Communist-orientated control of the DP is so dangerous,

. . .

More than 50% of US politicians are significant shareholders, particularly of Big Tech.

They have net worths of $50 million, etc.

You are being duped like MAGA in the cultural war of left versus right. The billionaires and politicians on both sides of the aisle are part of this. Many Trump appointees are billionaires. It is an economic cabal.

Although following TrumpStein Gate, and other actions even they have woken up to the fact that both governments do not work for the people. Just the billionaire class...

Fuck me - but you are indee aan idiot, The Republicans normally made their money in advance or inherited it - so the ah ve shares but they routinely do not trade them on the Stock Exchange. The Democrats have no such a background and most are really corrupt and loot the public purse or use insider tading on a big scale,

Where the ddiference comes in is beyond your malfunctioning braincels, That is why leader like Schumer, Schoff and Pelosi are so rich, In the case of the Democrats they are controlled easily - in the case of the Repyblicans they are not. That is shown by for isnaatnce the bust-up beteen Trump and Musk. Unlike in the case of Cabinet members Democrats take instructions from teir two major funders and reprt to them about implmentation, - in the ase o the Reublicans it just does not happen.

The above is rherefore BS supreme and not taking intoa ccount the potential takeve by the Communist n the DP of the Administration of the country - where the billionaires benefot and the politicians steal and get involved in corruption. The Quasi Communists make up 145 House members who are linked to the Communists - calling themselves Democratic Socialists. The whole political system is absed on Communism.

That is why the demcoratic world as a whole are under serious threat by what is happening in the USA 0 bit I do not t ink it is ousiders that realize here is a threat, Accirding to opinion polls the Democratic base is down to between 25 to 30% and instead of mocing o the center the Part is constantly moving further towatds the Communism,

DumbMike is a product of Apartheid.

Apartheid was explicitly anti-communist and enacted harsh laws to suppress communist activity and ideology.

Key points:

1. The apartheid government considered communism a major threat and passed the Suppression of Communism Act in 1950, which formally banned the Communist Party of South Africa and defined communism in extremely broad terms, making it illegal to promote any significant change seen as disturbing the status quo.

1. The South African Communist Party (SACP) and its members were vigorously persecuted by the apartheid state, and the party was forced to operate underground for much of the apartheid era.

1. Apartheid was founded on a platform of rigid racial segregation and white minority rule, which stands in direct opposition to communist principles of class equality and anti-racism.

1. During the Cold War, the apartheid regime aligned itself with Western powers as an anti-communist ally, which contributed to several Western countries' reluctance to strongly oppose apartheid for several decades.

1. The African National Congress (ANC), which led the struggle against apartheid, had an alliance with the SACP, and the apartheid government frequently tried to discredit the ANC by falsely labelling it as a communist front. However, these accusations were largely propaganda, and South Africa did not become communist after apartheid ended.

In summary, apartheid was a system of institutionalised racial oppression that actively suppressed communist and leftist opposition, rather than being communist itself.

ouMaaik says he hates communism ... mebbe so, but what I do know ... he sure does love a good ole white authoritarian dictatorship. Jawohl !

White authoritarian dictatorships that much worse than the non-white variety? Idi Amin turns in his grave...amongst a few others...

BB

I am honore by yor comments. It ddhoeed yu disregards facts and turns to perdonal attacks,

So you feel insulted, being described as a Putin supporter, ditto POTUS Batshit ??

Nothing personal, simply my opinion exemplified from the content of thousands of your posts.

so the ah ve shares but they routinely do not trade them on the Stock Exchange

…….

Old Mike has had a career of bullshitting even more stupid people. This is just another example of believing what he wants to believe. Here’s the facts:

Recent analyses suggest that stock ownership and trading activity are prevalent among both Republican and Democratic lawmakers

.

Based on analyses of 2024 financial disclosures by groups like Unusual Whales, it appears that Democratic lawmakers, as a group, exhibited a higher return on their stock portfolios (an estimated 31%) compared to their Republican counterparts (an estimated 26%). This difference in performance is attributed to the heavier weighting of Democratic portfolios towards technology stocks, which saw significant gains in 2024, while Republicans had more diversified holdings.

It is important to note:

1. Prevalence of Stock Ownership: A significant portion of both Republican and Democratic members of Congress own stocks, according to the Campaign Legal Center.
2. Individual Trading Habits: While one party may have a higher overall return, there are members from both parties who are active traders and achieve significant gains or losses. Some notable examples of active traders from both parties include Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Gilbert Ray Cisneros.
3. Data Limitations: The data used for these analyses, derived from publicly available disclosures, may not capture the full picture of Congressional stock trading, as some trades may be managed by third-party advisors or belong to family members.

Mozart

Fact is nobody denied that there are a minority os shareholders in teh RP that trade in stick from time to time/ In discussions in te S enate there were clar divisions as to wording of the draft act to stop insder trading - which wa the real topic. Out of the Cogress members members only two were mentioned as having trade on stock while membes - but none of the two was ever accused of insider trading.

The act as calle the Pewlosi A ct - she was regarded as the msot proved insider trading specialist, During discussion in the Senate the following issues were raised by various Senators, the onjecons to the act was a ban on trading in shares while being members of the Senate or the House, In the Senate objections have been raised against the act b Republican Senate members, That includes Senators who own shares they have inherited from heir parents and shares shares theey got through inmvesments they made before entering the political field and they were reluctant to have those shars frozen by law or forced to dispose of their shareholding by law/

However the above is a desperate measure to side-track the real issues rased and that is the development of internal communis, by what now became the House and Senate members with ultra=leftist leaning and the danger they represent to Democracy in the USA . People like AOC and the ultra-leftist elements in the Party do not own shares and when Mandani wants all commercial activities llike shops being taken over by the Government it tells the world they are supporting communism and not democracy. That was the issue raised in my comments and it came from various sources who wrtoe about internl takeover of the DP by "Democratic Socialists" amd the methods tehey use to ensure such a takeover.

SB tried tosidetrack the sisue by claiming that both Parties are rub by the fundrers - but that is BS supreme - under the DP the fnders roescribed policies that beneffit themselves - which is rare in the case of the RP's , That was why the split between Trump and Musk shows that the Republicn Party cannot be used to implement prescribed policies and administration In the SA the real political clash is beteen the RP wth its center-right elements and the ulta-leftist that has taken over the Democratic Party from within by candidate selection and the remainig centrists have no comtro; pver teh drection of te party itself, nteernally the D P has a majority of ultra-leftists in comto;;ing the party, They call themselves "Democratic Socialists" but in reality theya re Cpommnists in everything they supprt or oppose,

That si the problem - the issue of stockholding and trading has bugger-all to do withtat situation. What si the rpoblem is wthe take-over wfrom within by ultra-leftists supporting real communism. That is waht is dealt with in my oiginal comments on the issue,

.