Slashdot Mirror

I didn't RTFA but I'm gonna guess it has something to do with the wall and children in cages.

The "cages" are a product of feverish imagination. We are perfectly entitled to build a wall — nothing unethical about it.

The idea that they are raging SJWs who object to all immigration control is just silly

Abolish ICE is just that — because someone told them about the imaginary "children in cages", thousands of people call for the abolition of any and all efforts by the US to protect its borders. Communists are spear-heading the movement, as one might expect, and will even sally themselves with your money (the root of all evil) over it.

Surely you don't actually believe that.

Once again, you are shown to be in denial about the evil of the crowd you choose to affiliate with at best, or are willingly lying at worst...

I have a photograph of myself standing next to the first President Bush. I am not a Republican

Is there a picture of yourself giving a speech at a podium, while President Bush looks at you (admiringly)? Probably, not...

Ok, to rehash. You agree that Communism is evil, that's a relief. You seem to agree, that DSA are Communist enough to taint any member — if he is a member.

But you insist that:

• Sanders is a Democrat.
• Sanders is not a member of Democratic Socialists of America

The first point is not entirely relevant, so I'll just point out, that Sanders is constantly identified as "an Independent" — he is caucusing with Democrats in Senate, but he is not one of them. The usual state/party designation next to his name is (VT, I.).

He is running for a Democratic Party nomination this year, but that's neither here nor there. Ron Paul ran for Republican nomination several times, but he is a Libertarian...

Now, is he a member of DSA? Here is my evidence:

• He gave speeches at their events — more than once. (1991, 1994, 2006.)
• He is referred to as a member by the party's own materials: Bernie Sanders — the independent Maine [sic] Senator and DSA member.
• He thanked them for their helping him in his 2006 Senate race.
• The party's current strategy lists "grassroots work for Bernie Sanders" as its number one priority. And it is not mere words.
• He refers to himself in conversations as a "democratic socialist" (carefully leaving ambiguous, whether that means a political philosophy or a particular party).
• His own site promotes "talks" about both DSA and "democratic socialism".
• He is viewed rather admiringly by the DSA.

With so much evidence, it is way past time he repudiated their support, don't you think? Unless he welcomes it, of course. Far less evidence was ever presented, that Donald Trump was a KKK-member, for example, before angry voices and sneaky interviewers demanded, he "repudiates" that organization. Talk about "intellectual honesty"...

Even if a stubborn juror may insist, the above evidence does not convict Bernie Sanders of being a Communist beyond reasonable doubt, there is certainly enough to rule against him on the slightly lower preponderance of evidence standard. He is a Communist alright...

Lastly, about your (and others') attempts to distinguish between Communism and Socialism... The distinction is without difference — Socialism is merely Communism-lite.

But even if you disagree, who would want a Hugo Chavez — another "Socialist not a Communist" — to become President of their country? Because, other than the late Presidente's anti-Semitism, the Senator's ideas are indistinguishable from his...

I have a photograph of myself standing next to the first President Bush. I am not a Republican

Is there a picture of yourself giving a speech at a podium, while President Bush looks at you (admiringly)? Probably, not...

Ok, to rehash. You agree that Communism is evil, that's a relief. You seem to agree, that DSA are Communist enough to taint any member — if he is a member.

But you insist that:

• Sanders is a Democrat.
• Sanders is not a member of Democratic Socialists of America

The first point is not entirely relevant, so I'll just point out, that Sanders is constantly identified as "an Independent" — he is caucusing with Democrats in Senate, but he is not one of them. The usual state/party designation next to his name is (VT, I.).

He is running for a Democratic Party nomination this year, but that's neither here nor there. Ron Paul ran for Republican nomination several times, but he is a Libertarian...

Now, is he a member of DSA? Here is my evidence:

• He gave speeches at their events — more than once. (1991, 1994, 2006.)
• He is referred to as a member by the party's own materials: Bernie Sanders — the independent Maine [sic] Senator and DSA member.
• He thanked them for their helping him in his 2006 Senate race.
• The party's current strategy lists "grassroots work for Bernie Sanders" as its number one priority. And it is not mere words.
• He refers to himself in conversations as a "democratic socialist" (carefully leaving ambiguous, whether that means a political philosophy or a particular party).
• His own site promotes "talks" about both DSA and "democratic socialism".
• He is viewed rather admiringly by the DSA.

With so much evidence, it is way past time he repudiated their support, don't you think? Unless he welcomes it, of course. Far less evidence was ever presented, that Donald Trump was a KKK-member, for example, before angry voices and sneaky interviewers demanded, he "repudiates" that organization. Talk about "intellectual honesty"...

Even if a stubborn juror may insist, the above evidence does not convict Bernie Sanders of being a Communist beyond reasonable doubt, there is certainly enough to rule against him on the slightly lower preponderance of evidence standard. He is a Communist alright...

Lastly, about your (and others') attempts to distinguish between Communism and Socialism... The distinction is without difference — Socialism is merely Communism-lite.

But even if you disagree, who would want a Hugo Chavez — another "Socialist not a Communist" — to become President of their country? Because, other than the late Presidente's anti-Semitism, the Senator's ideas are indistinguishable from his...

Guy does not think he is a communist (hint: "democratic socialist" is not the same thing)

Whatever the fook "democratic socialist" means, Bernie Sanders is not that. He is a "Democratic Socialist" — an important distinction not easily obvious in verbal communications — a member of an American party, which adores Karl Marx and other Communists of the past and is arguing in support of collective ownership of the means of production. Page 10 from Exhibit A:

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production. Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace

That is Communism by definition. And the guy, who wrote the above is David Green — a member of DSA National Committee — is standing right next to Senator Sanders during his speech at a DSA convention...

If you choose to engage in a dialogue, be sure to state unambiguously upfront, whether:

1. You agree, that DSA are Communists (wholly or in a substantial part).
2. You accept, that Bernie Sanders is a member of that party.
3. Communism is the most murderous school of thought known to humanity so far.

Responses without clear answers to the above three questions will be returned unopened.

If he aint talking about government ownership of all means of production....he isn't a communist.

He may not be talking about it openly, but there are enough dog whistles in there to attract vast packs. But, whether he talks about it is irrelevant — whether he believes in it is important. And he does... Bernie Sanders is a member of an organization, that is a thin front for Communists.

They know of the toxicity of the "Communist" label (preferring "Socialist" instead), but aren't shy about their admiration for Marx. For example, here DSA speaks fondly of the founder of Communist Party of Italy. Separately a member of DSA's "National Committee" David Green once wrote:

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production. Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace.

— David Green, 2007 (page 10)

Ah, you'll say, that's all from capitalist haters, just can't be true, right? Well, here is fresh from DSA's own mouth (emphasis mine):

And while Sanders’ platform calls primarily for government to heal the ravages of unrestrained capitalism, it also includes more radical reforms that shift control over capital from corporations to social ownership

Good enough for you? Far less evidence was used to claim "Trump is a KKK-supporter" or something like that...

Anyone replying to this post and expecting to continue the conversation, please, be sure to state unambiguously:

• Whether you dispute DSA being a Communist organization (at least in substantial part).
• Whether you dispute Bernie Sanders being a member.
• Whether or not you think there is anything wrong with Communism to begin with.

Responses missing clear answers to the above will be returned unopened. Thank you.

Really.... There's little in common with the JBS or KKK in the "Tea Party" though they've gravitated to that bunch because they've more in common with the "Tea Party" than anything else out there. That doesn't make them anything like it. However...

In regards to your remarks about the Democrats not having anything to do with the American Communist Party...

Democratic Socialists of America
Young Democratic Socialists

As said of the founder of the DSA: "Throughout his life, Harrington simultaneously embraced the thinking of Karl Marx while at the same time rejecting the "actually existing" Communist systems of the Soviet Union, China, and Eastern Europe."

You can't embrace the thinking of Marx without really ending up being a Marxist- all the "actually existing" systems are variations on the theme.

The Communist Party USA

We already know this bunch, you mention them outright...

The Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS)

This is a unifying organization that represents a unified front for orgs such as DSA, CPUSA, etc. and is comprised of members of these other organizations.

Now, where am I going with this, you might ask...

These very much Communist/Marxist organizations, work within the Democratic Party to get their way on things.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5317/mobilized_in_motor_city/
http://mds-austin.pbworks.com/ (look for the Democratic Party Convention notes...)

There's more if you dig, but the claim that the Dems have Marxists and Communists in their make up and in their midst is an accurate one, unlike the one you made. MDS was directly involved with Obama's getting elected, has been directly involved with Democrat Party platform policies for years, and in the end, if you look at just what has been going on in this country for the last TWO years, there's been this move to try to make this country Marxist in nature, in spite of what the Constitution says on some of the actions taken.

Denying there's an influence there that permeates the organization is about like saying that the Republicans, Tea Party, or Libertarians are all members of the KKK or JBS. Neither of which is true. It is no better than saying the Dems have all the Communists there- not true either, but with the case of the leadership of the Democratic party, it IS the case if you do a bit of digging.

In most places "liberal" is equivalent to what Americans call "libertarian," and the parties Americans call "liberal' are known as "labor" or "left".

You mean the Democratic Party is not the party of socialists or communists - much less of the far left? Someone should do something about that.

• universal healthcare
• more retirement benefits provided by the govt
• more social equality

• lower taxes
• increase military spending
• lessen benefits provided by govt (Such as social security, unemployment insurance, ect...)

Hidden Cost Of Wal-Mart Jobs
Use of Safety Net Programs by Wal-Mart Workers in California

Arindrajit Dube
UC Berkeley Institute for Industrial Relations

Ken Jacobs
UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
from http://www.dsausa.org/lowwage/walmart/2004/walmart %20study.html
A Study for the UC Berkeley Labor Center
August 2, 2004

Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the United States, with over one million workers. It is the largest food retailer and the third largest pharmacy in the nation. The company employs approximately 44,000 workers in California, and has plans to expand significantly in the state over the next four years. Wal-Mart workers receive lower wages than other retail workers and are less likely to have health benefits. Other major retailers have begun to scale back wages and benefits in the state, citing their concerns about competition from Wal-Mart.

We estimate that Wal-Mart workers in California earn on average 31 percent less than workers employed in large retail as a whole, receiving an average wage of $9.70 per hour compared to the $14.01 average hourly earnings for employees in large retail (firms with 1,000 or more employees). In addition, 23 percent fewer Wal-Mart workers are covered by employer-sponsored health insurance than large retail workers as a whole. The differences are even greater when Wal-Mart workers are compared to unionized grocery workers. In the San Francisco Bay Area, non-managerial Wal-Mart employees earn on average $9.40 an hour, compared to $15.31 for unionized grocery workers--39 percent less--and are half as likely to have health benefits.

At these low-wages, many Wal-Mart workers rely on public safety net programs-- such as food stamps, Medicare, and subsidized housing--to make ends meet. The presence of Wal-Mart stores in California thus creates a hidden cost to the state's taxpayers.

This study is the first to quantify the fiscal costs of Wal-Mart's substandard wages and benefits on public safety net programs in California. It also explores the potential impact on public programs of Wal-Mart's competitive effect on industry standards.

Main Findings:

* Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public assistance programs in California comes at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimated $86 million annually; this is comprised of $32 million in health related expenses and $54 million in other assistance.

* The families of Wal-Mart employees in California utilize an estimated 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health care than the average for families of all large retail employees.

* The families of Wal-Mart employees use an estimated 38 percent more in other (non-health care) public assistance programs (such as food stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit, subsidized school lunches, and subsidized housing) than the average for families of all large retail employees.

* If other large California retailers adopted Wal-Mart's wage and benefits standards, it would cost taxpayers an additional $410 million a year in public assistance to employees.

For the complete study (840 KB pdf file):
http://www.dsausa.org/lowwage/walmart/2004/walmart %20study.pdf

Hidden Cost Of Wal-Mart Jobs
Use of Safety Net Programs by Wal-Mart Workers in California

Arindrajit Dube
UC Berkeley Institute for Industrial Relations

Ken Jacobs
UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
from http://www.dsausa.org/lowwage/walmart/2004/walmart %20study.html
A Study for the UC Berkeley Labor Center
August 2, 2004

Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the United States, with over one million workers. It is the largest food retailer and the third largest pharmacy in the nation. The company employs approximately 44,000 workers in California, and has plans to expand significantly in the state over the next four years. Wal-Mart workers receive lower wages than other retail workers and are less likely to have health benefits. Other major retailers have begun to scale back wages and benefits in the state, citing their concerns about competition from Wal-Mart.

We estimate that Wal-Mart workers in California earn on average 31 percent less than workers employed in large retail as a whole, receiving an average wage of $9.70 per hour compared to the $14.01 average hourly earnings for employees in large retail (firms with 1,000 or more employees). In addition, 23 percent fewer Wal-Mart workers are covered by employer-sponsored health insurance than large retail workers as a whole. The differences are even greater when Wal-Mart workers are compared to unionized grocery workers. In the San Francisco Bay Area, non-managerial Wal-Mart employees earn on average $9.40 an hour, compared to $15.31 for unionized grocery workers--39 percent less--and are half as likely to have health benefits.

At these low-wages, many Wal-Mart workers rely on public safety net programs-- such as food stamps, Medicare, and subsidized housing--to make ends meet. The presence of Wal-Mart stores in California thus creates a hidden cost to the state's taxpayers.

This study is the first to quantify the fiscal costs of Wal-Mart's substandard wages and benefits on public safety net programs in California. It also explores the potential impact on public programs of Wal-Mart's competitive effect on industry standards.

Main Findings:

* Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public assistance programs in California comes at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimated $86 million annually; this is comprised of $32 million in health related expenses and $54 million in other assistance.

* The families of Wal-Mart employees in California utilize an estimated 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health care than the average for families of all large retail employees.

* The families of Wal-Mart employees use an estimated 38 percent more in other (non-health care) public assistance programs (such as food stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit, subsidized school lunches, and subsidized housing) than the average for families of all large retail employees.

* If other large California retailers adopted Wal-Mart's wage and benefits standards, it would cost taxpayers an additional $410 million a year in public assistance to employees.

For the complete study (840 KB pdf file):
http://www.dsausa.org/lowwage/walmart/2004/walmart %20study.pdf

Most of the "store brand" products in Wal-Mart are manufactured by chinese manufacturers exclusively for Wal-Mart.

Consider "White Cloud" paper products (toilet paper, diapers, etc). Think that's a Procter and Gambel brand? Well, it was - but not anymore - P&G let the brand lapse in 1993, and Wal-Mart picked it up and uses it as the name for their store brand stuff.

Same's true for practicaly every product family in the store - every wonder why there are so many brands wal-mart carries that other stores don't? It's not their great selection - it's their great store-brand manufacturing at work.

That's is DEAD wrong. My wife works the night shift at walmart. She, and her coworkers, are not "locked-in". She's actually told me of some who will go out for their mid-night "lunch break".

Perhaps your wife works in a suburban/rural Walmart? My understanding is that the lock-ins take place in inner city Walmarts (yes, they do exist) for the ostensible "safety" of the employees (actually to prevent theft). Check this article here (from the NY Times but put on another page so you don't
have to register).

jf

You have about half a clue stick, lets take a look at the other half. Chinese labor is cheap because THE EMPLOYEES ARE SLAVES. Largely they are forced to work by the communist state, yes, China is a communist state, remember?

The basis of a free market economy is that companies are forced to compete on an "equal" playing field. Slave labor>/a> is not an equal playing field.

When I say that I'm a socialist, I'm saying I work for a nation of social justice, universal access to health care, where the people have the power. I don't believe that all capitalism is bad, nor do I believe that the government should control all aspects of your life. But, I do believe it is wrong for massive transnational corporations to usurp the role of government.

I believe that laws are necessary and that it is right and proper for many aspects of life to be either regulated or provided by the government. You disagree? OK, that's fine. Just don't forget about the police, firefighters, road construction workers, public health officials and facilities, train lines, airlines, telecommunications infrastructure, research funding, arts facilities, armed forces, parks, and water treatment facilities that are provided or heavily subsidized via the public coffers. And that's just in the U.S., a country that for decades has been scared of the term "socialism."

As the scandals in corporate America have so vividly demonstrated, Adam Smith's invisible hand does not guide our economy and our nation into the idealistic self-regulating paradise that proponents of pure capitalism would have us believe. Capitalism is not diametrically opposed to socialism.

• Capitalism is opposed to democracy.

Democratic socialism is the check against greed and corruption. It says, "Let the people decide their own destiny." It acknowledges that left unchecked, big businesses will underpay employees, pay little regard to the environment, and give little thought to the public good. We realize that certain aspects of life cannot be adequately provided by the market, and that it is the role of goverment to ensure that those aspects (health care, a safety net against starvation and homelessness, police and fire protection, social services....) are provided to the people who are the very base of that nation.

Communism was an excuse for totalitarians to highjack socialism and gut it of democracy. Capitalism is an excuse for the rich and powerful to replace a democracy with an oligarchy of the elite. The best part is that the capitalists have conned most people into believing that they (the people) are really the beneficiaries of this corporate power-grubbing!

So debate all you like. Just know what those terms mean when you use them.

But so many people focus on left vs right that it's easy to forget the model of political philosophies as a circle. As your example points out, it seems that many of our issues show where the ends of the circle join together!

Let's stick together and put our action where are mouths are:
MoveOn.org
EFF.org

And the web being what it is, it can't stamp out everything, so there's still evidence laying around at least in news stories.

Senator, there are exactly 56 card-carrying members of the Democratic Socialists of America in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Official political party sites

Democratic National Committee

Democratic Socialists of America

Green Parties of North America

Labor Party

Libertarian Party

Natural Law Party

Reform Party

Republican National Committee

Socialist Party USA

Workers Party

Official candidate sites

Gary Bauer

Bill Bradley

Pat Buchanan

George W. Bush

Steve Forbes

Al Gore

Orrin Hatch

Alan Keyes

John McCain

Donald Trump