9 votes

Would 20-40 Million Deaths Have Been OK?

The shameful support by Progressives of their bloody, authoritarian Commander-In-Chief follows a long line of sellouts from the socialist/Marxist/Progressive wing of the Left.

Tom Woods is one honest historian who will not let them off the hook for their vile complicity:

Anyone not familiar with the record-shaking truths in the work of R.J. Rummel on Democide needs to get up to speed.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

[Sellout] [Progressive] Regarding Obama, pick one

Obama's in no way a progressive. He campaigned pushing progressive policies, but he's shown his true corporatist colors in dropping almost all of them now that his administration is in power. Any progressive who's paying attention is disgusted with this administration. Those who are still in love with them, well.. I just call them democrats.

reedr3v's picture

But Progressivism has always favored war and

a managerial economy, from Teddy Roosevelt the first "Progressive" who was also a Republican to Wilson, FDR, Truman, all the way. All the same; Obama is merely the one that all their successful policies are crashing on top of, from the inner contradictions and false assumptions that always underpinned them.

The war machine's been a constant for every administration

regardless of their label. I can't speak for the past, but modern progressivism is very anti-war. The problem is that our politicians talk the talk but don't walk the walk, as it would go against their bottom line as soon as they've entertained any fantasy of winning an election.

It's easy for politicians to wax anti-war when all's said and done and they couldn't do a thing to stop what's been set in motion (even if they really wanted to). NBC, the supposedly liberal network, is little different, being owned by a military contractor and all.

reedr3v's picture

No, the modern Progressives, as in the past,

only talk the talk. They have always been complicit in war crimes, turning a blind eye to Stalin's crimes, then Mao's mass murders. The entire socialist movement covered up those two Democides and focused all attention only on Hitler's horrendous but far smaller murder statistics. If you are unfamiliar with the work of R.J. Rummel documenting these democides, you are simply in the Progressive matrix, deluded by propaganda.

And your 2nd paragraph is similiarly apologetic for war crimes. No. both Ron Paul and Gary Johnson have the conviction and moral strength to immediately reduce conflict, substitute diplomacy or minding our own business, and radically reduce the military. All of your Progressives modern or past, have loved a big strong Empire, just as they love a big strong federal government centrally managing everything and everybody on the planet.

Sorry, as is true of most Liberals/Progressives, you cannot distinguish between talk and reality. That is because the heart of your ideology is rotten: based on coercion backed up by federal guns. Period. Progressivism is anti-peace, anti-liberty because those concept would interfere with their ideal of total control of individuals by a presumed enlightened elite that knows much better than ordinary humans how they should behave.

Nothing has improved under Obama, and he's not unusual in history. Nothing improved under the Repubs either. They are equally phony.

Oh sure, an entire label of people just loves genocide

This isn't even a worthwhile conversation when one has abandoned all respect for the person they're talking to from the get-go, as you have, so I'm not going to spend a lot of energy responding to you. I hate the war machine and foreign intervention. You don't know me and the straw men you've constructed don't apply to me, but of course you'll never listen or learn from anyone who tells you what I'm telling you. You have hate in your heart and have closed your eyes and covered your ears.

Obama said he'd do one thing and then set out to do entirely the opposite. You can claim I'm naiive for believing him to begin with, but it's absurd for you to tell me here and now that I love war because I voted for someone who lied to me. Did you vote for Bush in 2000? Guess what, he ran on an anti-war ticket and then threw all that out the window ASAP. The war machine doesn't give a shit who the president is.

And your 2nd paragraph is similiarly apologetic for war crimes. No.
You didn't understand it. My point isn't that being unable to do anything is a justification for allowing war. My point is that it's easy for any politician or news outlet to be pro-war in rhetoric and then only speak out against the war once it's unpopular but no one can argue it's in those politicians' hands anymore.

reedr3v's picture

I was speaking of the ideology,

you are correct I don't know you personally nor have I any way of knowing why you identify with a set of beliefs that place centralized control over Liberty and Peace.

To the extent Progressives (many today) excuse Obama's wars and domestic tyranny they are complicit, as most Liberals have been complicit about the unequaled crimes against humanity by those they still give a pass. Am I angry, you bet; authoritarians of both parties won control a century ago, and this country has been going down a bloody path toward serfdom ever since.

Of course I didn't vote for Bush, have not voted for either of the evil choices my entire long life except writing in the one clear peace and freedom candidate, Ron Paul.

Good points

I call both Obama and Romney Goldman Sachs candidates.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15


Posted on Twitter to wake up some folks.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15