Show me something in my posts or in Lori's which is specifically "communist", bearing in mind that:
(1) The principle under law that he who wishes to collect a debt must prove he is rightfully entitled to collect is not communism;
(2) The idea that insolvent companies have a claim upon the US Treasury or the Federal Reserve for restoration of their solvency through asset purchase is not communism.
Hey ex-Tex, speaking as one “commie” to another, you might get a kick out of this thread.
That's a fair demand. In a previous post, I already explained that the idea that, if someone disagrees with bashing of Goldman, CEOs, etc, then he must be one of them (working for Goldman, be a CEO or another "rich") belongs to Marx. It was one of his claims to fame. You hear this expressed all the time on FR.
I have also explained --- at length on other threads -- and will be glad to do it again, that bashing the "financiers" has been the standard strategy, started also by Marx, and continued by Progressives (1890s through Wilson) and Rosevelt in this country, Hitler and Mussolinit (1920-1940s), Lenin and his followers (1890 to date).
This always made sense to those that wanted to undermine capitalism because finance is difficult to understand Indeed, what do they really produce, those financiers? What good does that do for the country? Seems like nothing. To the uninformed, it does look like nothing: they just manipulate the markets to satisfy their gre-e-e-ed (that evil thing only financiers have) and steal from productive members of society. Compare this to a rich owner of a steel factory. It's not as easy to send the dogs at him: you can see steel, you know that tanks and other things are made out of it. You know that he is rich but still useful to the country. So it is always convenient to sick the dogs on the "financiers."
That is the sole reason a regular recession has become Great Depression. Like today, he used people's frustration and made it look that it was "financiers" and the "speculators" who created the crisis.
The same is done today. Everyone is mad at the banks for "taking our money." But banks never asked for the bailout and tried to refuse it. That's a secret here on FR. Just look at thread after thread about Goldman Sacks, which vigorously fought against taking the money --- everyone is mad at them. Not a word about Detroit CEOs: it is they who made several trips to Congress and even blackmailed it (give us money or there'll be social unrest). Go ahead, count the number of threads raging about car-makers, who really begged for the bailout. Ah, but they are not in finance, they produce products to which we can relate, it is not as easy to anger the ignorant against them.
But facts don't matter any more. They don't matter because there has been too much propaganda and even conservatives swallowed it. In Germany, too, it was common sense that financiers --- Jewish financiers (are there any other?) --- started WW I, created 1929 crash, etc. Some people were trying to argue against this nonsense. They too were called capitalist pigs or Jew-sympathizers -- sort of the way I am treated when I question the unsupported accusations.
I would gladly discuss facts, but I am not allowed to do that. One is not even allowed to question posts that are completely empty of facts but full of accusations. And those posts often quickly reveal that the poster does not understand the words he is using (finance and economics are complex) and does not even know what Fed or Goldman do while bashing them. I asked for reasons behind accusations, but none follow. I am supposed to get in line with the prevailing thinking --- or else I must be Goldman's owner.
This is not a discussion, this is hysteria. The same hysteria, against the same "villains," that existed in 1930s here as well as Germany and Italy.
If you have specific questions or remarks, I only happy to discuss them. But you should not buy into hysteria until you really know the facts. And. if you are really a conservative and care about core American principles, you should stand up against the defamation of innocent people that are routinely accused without a shred of evidence.