Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Today's News > Politics / Elections

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 14-10-2012, 04:08 PM   #21
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by porridge View Post
The trouble is the ones who are always pointing any of this out are always hardcore KKK Nazi reich wing loons...so Im admittedly sceptical of what they keep trying to shove in yah face
They are programmed, anything wrong and it's either Jews or communists, usually both. Nothing else exists outside of that paradigm.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 04:16 PM   #22
gremlin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: moo moo land
Posts: 26,722
Likes: 1,735 (1,048 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
On man, Obama is not a communist.
Rothschilds controls communism as they funded it and capitalism as they print the money.
__________________
“We trade real labor for fake money to pay fraudulent taxes on stuff we don’t own.” Doreen Hannes

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist." we live in satan world.
gremlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 04:42 PM   #23
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gremlin View Post
Rothschilds controls communism as they funded it and capitalism as they print the money.
Yes they funded communist movements which weren't even communist in nature. Yes they control a lot of groups which claim to be communist, either directly or indirectly, but Rothschilds are not communist, they are monopoly capitalists at heart, it's what they and all elites have ever been, and what they will always be. They gain NOTHING from collectivism, because that means they'd have to give up their trillions. This is really very elementary, it's not complicated stuff.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 04:54 PM   #24
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
They gain NOTHING from collectivism, because that means they'd have to give up their trillions. This is really very elementary, it's not complicated stuff.
They use collectivism as a tool for their crimes, centralise everything and you only have to steal from one pot.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 04:56 PM   #25
tenzingnorgay
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,441
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by king triad View Post
I think about 95% of Infowars is disinfo so I didn't watch it...so who do you think his real father is?..
http://www.obamasrealfather.com/
tenzingnorgay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 04:58 PM   #26
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lu__ View Post
They use collectivism as a tool for their crimes, centralise everything and you only have to steal from one pot.
I agree with this but that still proves that they ARE NOT collectivists, thus they are communist in name only. Beneath the veil ,they are monopoly capitalists.

Last edited by vancity eagle; 14-10-2012 at 05:00 PM.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 05:05 PM   #27
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
I agree with this but that still proves that they ARE NOT collectivists, thus they are communist in name only. Beneath the veil ,they are monopoly capitalists.
Monopoly and Capitalism are Antonyms, you are correct though, those who create Collectivism do intend create "equality", or whatever the myth is.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 05:26 PM   #28
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lu__ View Post
Monopoly and Capitalism are Antonyms, you are correct though, those who create Collectivism do intend create "equality", or whatever the myth is.
No they are not antonyms, they are 2 different things entirely that you can't even compare. A monopoly CAN exist within capitalism, however a monopoly CANNOT exist in communism. It is communism that is actually the direct opposite of a monopoly.
A monopoly is not the only problem that can arise with capitalism by the way, too much wealth in the hands of any private structure leaves room for disproportionate influence on society within certain interest groups, this can lead to widespread corruption. It doesn't have to be a monopoly for it to have a detrimental effect on society.

Last edited by vancity eagle; 14-10-2012 at 05:33 PM.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 05:38 PM   #29
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
No they are not antonyms, they are 2 different things entirely that you can't even compare. A monopoly CAN exist within capitalism, however a monopoly CANNOT exist in communism. It is communism that is actually the direct opposite of a monopoly.
A monopoly is not the only problem that can arise with capitalism by the way, too much wealth in the hands of any private structure leaves room for disproportionate influence on society within certain interest groups, this can lead to widespread corruption. It doesn't have to be a monopoly for it to have a detrimental effect on society.
We must have different lexicons.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 05:52 PM   #30
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lu__ View Post
We must have different lexicons.
it appears we do



cap·i·tal·ism
   [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA

noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth

private individuals or corporations can have a monopoly. Nothing here that says capitalism cannot be a monopoly, in fact the very defenition of capitalism suggests monopoly.

mo·nop·o·ly
   [muh-nop-uh-lee] Show IPA

noun, plural mo·nop·o·lies.
1.
exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.

2.
an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.

3.
the exclusive possession or control of something.

4.
something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.

5.
a company or group that has such control.
EXPAND




I dont see how Capitalism is an antonym to Monopoly, it isn't. Capitalism doesnt have to be a monoply but it can be. Look closely at the defenition. By the very defenition of Communism or Collectivism a monopoly cannot exist.

Last edited by vancity eagle; 14-10-2012 at 05:54 PM.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 05:54 PM   #31
isuncertain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 291
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by king triad View Post
I think about 95% of Infowars is disinfo so I didn't watch it...so who do you think his real father is?..
Hello king,

If you have 90 odd minutes spare give Joel Gilbert's documentary Dreams From My Real Father a watch.
I saw it last night and its compelling stuff.
If Obama's old man is not Frank Marshall Davis then


is.
isuncertain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 06:01 PM   #32
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
it appears we do



cap·i·tal·ism
   [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA

noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth

I think there is a contradiction here, the contradiction is in private ownership and corporations. Corporations are created by the State, the State claims ownership of all property. Therefore you cannot have Corporations and Private Property.

private individuals or corporations can have a monopoly. Nothing here that says capitalism cannot be a monopoly, in fact the very defenition of capitalism suggests monopoly.

mo·nop·o·ly
   [muh-nop-uh-lee] Show IPA

noun, plural mo·nop·o·lies.
1.
exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.

2.
an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.

BINGO

3.
the exclusive possession or control of something.

4.
something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.

5.
a company or group that has such control.
EXPAND




I dont see how Capitalism is an antonym to Monopoly, it isn't. Capitalism doesnt have to be a monoply but it can be. Look closely at the defenition. By the very defenition of Communism or Collectivism a monopoly cannot exist.
The council/church controls all the resources under collectivism, I would suggest ownership is only important as to the ability to control resources.

Last edited by lu__; 14-10-2012 at 06:02 PM.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 06:08 PM   #33
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

^


corporations are private no matter how you try and spin it or play semantics. They have private owners, board members etc. There is nothing collective about a corporation, not in the Western world at least.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 06:12 PM   #34
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
^


corporations are private no matter how you try and spin it or play semantics. They have private owners, board members etc. There is nothing collective about a corporation, not in the Western world at least.
Without The State (Collectivism) there would be no Corporations, they do indeed have Private ownership, that's how it works.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 06:23 PM   #35
vancity eagle
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,492
Likes: 4,419 (2,496 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lu__ View Post
Without The State (Collectivism) there would be no Corporations, they do indeed have Private ownership, that's how it works.
what are you arguing here, you are just going round in circles and hiding from your initial statement that Monopoly and Capitalism are opposites.

And yes corporations can exist without a state, why do you think they call them multinationals ? They dont even exist within any state, nor are they loyal to any state, they just move around exploiting from land to land.

If there were no states, meaning no countries with international borders, constitutions etc. there would still be corporations.
vancity eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 06:33 PM   #36
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
what are you arguing here, you are just going round in circles and hiding from your initial statement that Monopoly and Capitalism are opposites.

This statement is false.


And yes corporations can exist without a state, why do you think they call them multinationals ? They dont even exist within any state, nor are they loyal to any state, they just move around exploiting from land to land.

Corporations are a legal smokeshields for criminals , they are always created and protected by the State (Collectivism).
If you disagree, show me where a Corporation operates that is not a State.
There is nowhere that is not a State, we are in a Global Collectivist System.
The fact that Corporations operate in more than one State is completely irrelevant.


If there were no states, meaning no countries with international borders, constitutions etc. there would still be corporations.

Prove it.
.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 09:40 PM   #37
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,954
Likes: 1,346 (693 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fourtheye777 View Post
This forum just seems like a living paradox at times, simultaneously arguing that we are living in a fascistic system that solely benefits the private corporations of the elitist upper class and and yet also stating the powers that be are trying to create a society that's a marxist wet dream? I'm confused...
Fascism and Nazism (National Socialism) are just branches of Communism.

Quote:
Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini (Italian pronunciation: [beˈnito mussoˈlini]; 29 July 1883 – 28 April 1945) was an Italian politician who led the National Fascist Party, ruling the country from 1922 to his ousting in 1943, and is credited with being one of the key figures in the creation of fascism.

Originally a member of the Italian Socialist Party and editor of the Avanti! from 1912 to 1914, Mussolini fought in World War I as an ardent nationalist and created the Fasci di Combattimento in 1919, catalyzing his nationalist and socialist beliefs in the Fascist Manifesto,
Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
^


corporations are private no matter how you try and spin it or play semantics. They have private owners, board members etc. There is nothing collective about a corporation, not in the Western world at least.
They are owned by millions of small shareholders through pension schemes, the biggest shareholders are US State and Federal Government workers. police, fire service etc pension schemes, the Norwegian Government pension scheme has over 500 billion invested. The directors are paid a salary and do not own the companies. So in effect they are half way between private and publicly owned although they are more Communist since the directors do not get any profit from the company.

A truly private company would be owned by a single person or family or a partnership, none of the largest companies are owned in that way.
__________________
The Beast from the sea with 7 heads, 10 horns and 10 crowns has been wounded to one of the heads, the 2 horned beast from the earth commanded us to worship the 7 headed beast but on 23rd June 2016 we said no.


Don't forget, everything is foretold you just need to have the eyes to see and the ears to hear.

Last edited by bendoon; 14-10-2012 at 10:09 PM.
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 09:54 PM   #38
ritchs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ultima Thule
Posts: 7,588
Likes: 422 (225 Posts)
Default

My simplistic understanding is that

Communism: is where the state controls production (Stalin, Mao)

Fascism is where the corporations run the state (Mussolini, Hitler)

They are basically the same, so far as the people living under them are concerned. They are both brutal, totalitarian regimes, dictatorships where individual rights are sacrificed for the 'overall good'

Two sides of a coin
__________________
“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves."

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
ritchs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 10:02 PM   #39
lu__
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ritchs View Post
My simplistic understanding is that

Communism: is where the state controls production (Stalin, Mao)

Fascism is where the corporations run the state (Mussolini, Hitler)
Right, I wouldn't make a real distinction between the State and other Corporations though.

Last edited by lu__; 14-10-2012 at 10:07 PM.
lu__ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2012, 10:21 PM   #40
bikerdruid
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: north peace bioregion of north america's great boreal forest
Posts: 27,115
Likes: 611 (379 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vancity eagle View Post
No they are not antonyms, they are 2 different things entirely that you can't even compare.
antonyns are words with opposing meanings.
up and down, for example.

Last edited by bikerdruid; 14-10-2012 at 10:22 PM.
bikerdruid is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:36 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.