LWDT V: Completing the Five Thread Plan

[Oil exporting People]

how do you think US should balance the budget? military certainly needs to be curtailed, but that still leaves a deficit around 400-500 billion a year.

No, we need to be drastically increasing military spending. Since 9/11, defense spending has only grown by 38% as compared to 61% for other types of spending; Defense outlays are at around 15% of federal spending, which is actually lower than it was before September 11th. Since 2010, defense spending as % of GDP has declined from 4.7% to 3.3% in 2015. The end result of this policy has been the near destruction of American military capabilities, in that we now have fewer combat-ready BCTs overall than invaded Iraq in 2003, the U.S. Air Force has been getting less training then the Russians and Chinese since at least 2013, and the U.S. Navy is in outright danger of collapse of capabilities.

This whole meme of "Military Spending Insanity" needs to die already.

[Oil exporting People]

>> 52% of prisoners in Federal prisoners are on drug charges
>> "I-it's less than a fifth"

lol

Furthermore

According to the ACLU’s original analysis, marijuana arrests now account for over half of all drug arrests in the United States. Of the 8.2 million marijuana arrests between 2001 and 2010, 88% were for simply having marijuana.

But anything to keep 'degeneracy' away. After all, your's is the only kind of degeneracy allowed.

Do you even bother to read before you post?

[Conserative Morality]

>> 52% of prisoners in Federal prisoners are on drug charges
>> "I-it's less than a fifth"

lol

Furthermore


But anything to keep 'degeneracy' away. After all, your's is the only kind of degeneracy allowed.

Do you even bother to read before you post?

Do you ever actually read your own sources?

More than half of all state prison inmates were violent offenders, while more than half of federal prisoners were drug offenders

Between 2001 and 2013, more than half of prisoners serving sentences of more than a year in federal facilities were convicted of drug offenses (table 15 and table 16). On September 30, 2013 (the end of the most recent fiscal year for which federal offense data were available), 98,200 inmates (51% of the federal prison population) were imprisoned for possession, trafficking, or other drug crimes.

No, that would be too degenerate. That's why liberals do, after all. Fucking liberals.

[Oil exporting People]

Do you ever actually read your own sources?

More than half of all state prison inmates were violent offenders, while more than half of federal prisoners were drug offenders

Between 2001 and 2013, more than half of prisoners serving sentences of more than a year in federal facilities were convicted of drug offenses (table 15 and table 16). On September 30, 2013 (the end of the most recent fiscal year for which federal offense data were available), 98,200 inmates (51% of the federal prison population) were imprisoned for possession, trafficking, or other drug crimes.

No, that would be too degenerate. That's why liberals do, after all. Fucking liberals.

Yes I do and I'd highly recommend you start doing so as well:

Between 2001 and 2013, more than half of prisonersserving sentences of more than a year in federal facilities
were convicted of drug offenses (table 15 and table 16). On September 30, 2013 (the end of the most recent fiscal year for which federal offense data were available), 98,200 inmates (51% of the federal prison population) were imprisoned for possession, trafficking, or other drug crimes. Since 2001, the percentage of federal prisoners convicted of violent, property, and drug offenses has decreased.

Clearly, they aren't getting busted for having a joint as you are so desperate to imply. Further, you're playing statistical games as there are 1,574,700 persons in prison overall, but only 193,775 in Federal custody.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

What?

I thought my question was clear. How did that action lead to communist internationalism?

[Oil exporting People]

What?

I thought my question was clear. How did that action lead to communist internationalism?

So by your logic, since the actions didn't lead to global communism, it wasn't an effort at Communist internationalism?

[Democratic Communist Federation]

No, we need to be drastically increasing military spending.

One nation cannot, realistically, do it alone. However, there needs to be some form of international politburo, operated through a proletarian democracy (communism from below or libertarian communism), which enforces global offensive demilitarization and collective security.

[Torrocca]

Do you ever actually read your own sources?



No, that would be too degenerate. That's why liberals do, after all. Fucking liberals.

Yes I do and I'd highly recommend you start doing so as well:

Between 2001 and 2013, more than half of prisonersserving sentences of more than a year in federal facilities
were convicted of drug offenses (table 15 and table 16). On September 30, 2013 (the end of the most recent fiscal year for which federal offense data were available), 98,200 inmates (51% of the federal prison population) were imprisoned for possession, trafficking, or other drug crimes. Since 2001, the percentage of federal prisoners convicted of violent, property, and drug offenses has decreased.

Clearly, they aren't getting busted for having a joint as you are so desperate to imply. Further, you're playing statistical games as there are 1,574,700 persons in prison overall, but only 193,775 in Federal custody.

I like how, because possession of weed is conflated with trafficking of it (which can be tacked on as a charge for something as simple as bringing the weed you smoke across state lines) and other drug crimes, that means the majority of cases aren't for the possession of it. :^)

[Conserative Morality]

Do you ever actually read your own sources?



No, that would be too degenerate. That's why liberals do, after all. Fucking liberals.

Yes I do and I'd highly recommend you start doing so as well:

Between 2001 and 2013, more than half of prisonersserving sentences of more than a year in federal facilities
were convicted of drug offenses (table 15 and table 16). On September 30, 2013 (the end of the most recent fiscal year for which federal offense data were available), 98,200 inmates (51% of the federal prison population) were imprisoned for possession, trafficking, or other drug crimes. Since 2001, the percentage of federal prisoners convicted of violent, property, and drug offenses has decreased.

Clearly, they aren't getting busted for having a joint as you are so desperate to imply. Further, you're playing statistical games as there are 1,574,700 persons in prison overall, but only 193,775 in Federal custody.

"Y-you're wrong because I read into your post an implication that wasn't there! =^^^^("

10/10, I can see why you lot won the war.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

So by your logic, since the actions didn't lead to global communism, it wasn't an effort at Communist internationalism?

No, I am saying it was not an effort at communist internationalism. It was just a political action carried out in the interests of the former Soviet Union.

[Canadensia]

Perhaps "mature" as in his ideological outlook, although I'd hardly consider an adulterous drunkard who refused to work and mooched off of his best friend until the day he died "mature". Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact. Marx the man was a truly deplorable human being with few redeeming qualities.

Wow. An ad hominem against the dead. How any of what you wrote is relevant to what I wrote, other than putting you on the losing side of the argument (by definition of ad hominem) is beyond me.

Ad hominem against the dead?

Alright mate, you've asked for it. I was going to be polite and just point out the obvious idiocy of lionizing a truly deplorable man, rather than lambasting your ideology for the farce that it is, but seeing as how you can't even tolerate the mildest bit of criticism, I think it's time someone put you in your place.

Communism is reactionary garbage against an economic system that, while admittedly having major flaws, is astronomically preferable to the horrendous genocidal apocalypse that is Communism. Marx, a man you apparently idolize, was a disappointment of a son who, after drinking away his tuition money and flunking out of multiple colleges, was financially cut off by his father until he got his act together. He didn't, instead mooching off of his trust-fund shill of a BFF Engels until the day he died. Somehow, by some miraculous stroke of luck, he managed to marry a wealthy and respectable woman, only to waste away her dowry and cheat on her at every available opportunity (even to the point of fathering at least one known bastard who he refused to legitimize). He eventually died fairly young at the age of 64 from bronchitis, no doubt due to his appalling personal hygiene and unhealthy lifestyle. He was, by any decent measure, a horrible person and does not by any stretch of the imagination deserve to be remembered otherwise.

The basic ideals of Communism that he professed were already being supported for thousands of years by various groups and movements at different points in time (notably the abolition of private property, socio-economic equality and even the elimination of money as a form of currency). Somehow this rat bastard managed to become the face of Communism, but that's neither here nor there, because the point is that in the century following his death entire countries would murder millions in his name; and for what? I've been told countless times by people who lionize this creep that "true Communism has never been achieved" or some such nonsense. So what was the point of slaughtering millions in travesties like the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution and Dekulakization (just to name a few) for the sake of achieving some insane reactionary dystopia that didn't even come to fruition.

But I assume you already know all of this, considering how you're a university professor and this is your niche interest. Which, frankly, brings me to my underlying point. You come into this forum pretty much every goddamn day and either belligerently interject into an ongoing discussion or post some self-loathing nonsense about how much you hate your own country and things would be so much better if the world adopted your particular take on an ideological framework that's failed ad infinitum. It's tiresome, irritating and above all is indicative of why your ideology is trash in the first place. All Communism provides is a bunch of bitching and complaining, with few viable solutions or alternatives.

In short, Communism is bad and you should feel bad.

[Oil exporting People]

"Y-you're wrong because I read into your post an implication that wasn't there! =^^^^("

10/10, I can see why you lot won the war.

Can't be reading an implication when it was blatantly stated:

Furthermore

According to the ACLU’s original analysis, marijuana arrests now account for over half of all drug arrests in the United States. Of the 8.2 million marijuana arrests between 2001 and 2010, 88% were for simply having marijuana.

But anything to keep 'degeneracy' away. After all, your's is the only kind of degeneracy allowed.

Nice dodge on the issue of the Federal prisoner counts, by the way.

[Oil exporting People]

I like how, because possession of weed is conflated with trafficking of it (which can be tacked on as a charge for something as simple as bringing the weed you smoke across state lines) and other drug crimes, that means the majority of cases aren't for the possession of it. :^)

Given that only 3% of State Prisoners are in for possession, I find that to be a reasonable benchmark for Federal Prisoners.

[Oil exporting People]

So by your logic, since the actions didn't lead to global communism, it wasn't an effort at Communist internationalism?

No, I am saying it was not an effort at communist internationalism. It was just a political action carried out in the interests of the former Soviet Union.

> Attempting to establish Communist regimes isn't Communist internationalism

Again, what?

[Genivaria]

No, I am saying it was not an effort at communist internationalism. It was just a political action carried out in the interests of the former Soviet Union.

> Attempting to establish Communist regimes isn't Communist internationalism

Again, what?

I would argue that Stalin's Russia was more interested in creating friendly buffer/puppet states than for the sake of spreading the revolution.

[Jackania yugo]

One question...do any of you here do RP's?

West les ores does.

[Torrocca]

No, I am saying it was not an effort at communist internationalism. It was just a political action carried out in the interests of the former Soviet Union.

> Attempting to establish Communist regimes isn't Communist internationalism

Again, what?

>What is creating buffer states against the West

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Bye

[Democratic Communist Federation]

> Attempting to establish Communist regimes isn't Communist internationalism

Again, what?

When did I say it was? And how did your comment even address this issue.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

I would argue that Stalin's Russia was more interested in creating friendly buffer/puppet states than for the sake of spreading the revolution.

Yes!

[Genivaria]

I would argue that Stalin's Russia was more interested in creating friendly buffer/puppet states than for the sake of spreading the revolution.

Yes!

Don't...don't agree with me.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

>What is creating buffer states against the West

This entire conversation has me confused. Could that be the intent? Trolling the thread?

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Don't...don't agree with me.

Why not? You would rather have your views dismissed?

[Torrocca]

Yes!

Don't...don't agree with me.

Oof ouch owie this is a dagger right into my left unity

[Canadensia]

> Attempting to establish Communist regimes isn't Communist internationalism

Again, what?

I would argue that Stalin's Russia was more interested in creating friendly buffer/puppet states than for the sake of spreading the revolution.

Eh, yes and no.

Stalin's personal take on Communist internationalism was Socialism in One Nation, that is to say uniting the world under the Soviet Union (either through direct annexation or the establishment of client states) rather than supporting various revolutions and letting them set up their own independent governments after they succeeded in ousting their previous regimes.

Whether or not that's more direct imperialism than actual Communist internationalism, I don't know, but I'd say it counts as both.