Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MrB
I hope he’s going to gradually ramp up the usage of this term until he doesn’t refer to liberals or liberalism except by the more descriptive and accurate terms “communists” and “communism”.

That's a good point, that nowadays people who call themselves "prog" or "liberal" really aren't either (in the classical sense of "progressive", like a Bull Mooser), but are in fact Stalinists in drag.

The proof of thesis would be a line by line comparison of that person's known public opinions and affinities, to a) the 1934 COMINTERN platform (or some similar definitive docutment -- there are three or four that could serve) or b) the 1952 or 1948 Democratic platform (in 1948, the pseudo-"prog" Stalinists were all off at a rump convention, so the real Democrats were running the Democratic Party).

Proof of the pudding.

Programmatic comparo, point by point, and then score each personality or celeb or newspaper against the two, and assign them to either the CPUSA in Drag, or the old liberal crowd, objectively. Hubert Humphrey and Adlai Stevenson would doubtless be liberals, as would be, say, John Lindsay, former mayor of New York.

4 posted on 04/18/2012 1:28:46 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: lentulusgracchus

Yes, and if you want to see a liberal stumble all over themselves, ask the question -

“so, if democrats/progressives/liberals aren’t communists, how would their beliefs be different if they were?”


5 posted on 04/18/2012 1:35:11 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson