BLM, tool of the Marxist

[jimboston]

That’s all you got?

I don’t think I’ve ranted and raved like that... but if you’re so sensitive that’s how you’ve interpreted my posts...

... well I’m sorry. Sorry that you’re such a pansy.

[mrswdk]

... well I’m sorry. Sorry that you’re such a pansy.

JDIZZLE GET REKD

[The ram]

I made this thread to show how blacks are used by the globalists intent on worldwide Marxism. As per usual in this forum that went way over your heads and you all went down the path that the globalist wants. Preying on your emotions.

The socialist has used black since they found out how white society reacted to the great migration of the late 19th early 20th century. And it has been the same reaction repeated over and over in every single western country that has had large black immigration.

https://youtu.be/GeOKNYSVNck

https://youtu.be/V31g1ruQNXw

Until any of these celebrities, politicians and sports stars actually go and live in black areas, how can their opinions be taken seriously.

[jimboston]

I made this thread to show how blacks are used by the globalists intent on worldwide Marxism. As per usual in this forum that went way over your heads and you all went down the path that the globalist wants. Preying on your emotions.

The socialist has used black since they found out how white society reacted to the great migration of the late 19th early 20th century. And it has been the same reaction repeated over and over in every single western country that has had large black immigration.

https://youtu.be/GeOKNYSVNck

https://youtu.be/V31g1ruQNXw

Until any of these celebrities, politicians and sports stars actually go and live in black areas, how can their opinions be taken seriously.

The BLM movement and related movements, both agreeing and opposing are used by many different individuals and groups to promote their own agendas. This movement is not being led or coordinated by a secret cabal of Globalist Socialists. That premise is ridiculous. I am sure there are people who hold a Globalist Socialist view... probably most who hold this view don’t even recognize it as such and certainly wouldn’t label it that way. I don’t think it’s a popular position and won’t manifest anytime soon... not when there is so much racism, and us/them mentality is still so pervasive... it can;t coalesce in that environment. The division created by (maybe better to say enflamed by) BLM only hurts the Globalist Socialist agenda.

I just reread your OP and it’s all over the place and self-contradictory. Perhaps if you came up with a coherent and concise thesis you could get some by-in.

[Jdsizzleslice]

This movement is not being led or coordinated by a secret cabal of Globalist Socialists. That premise is ridiculous.

The founders of the Black Lives Matter Movement are professed Marxists. In other words, Revolutionary Communists. Your statement is not factually correct.

I am sure there are people who hold a Globalist Socialist view... probably most who hold this view don’t even recognize it as such and certainly wouldn’t label it that way.

Is not socialism at its core a global viewpoint?

I don’t think it’s a popular position and won’t manifest anytime soon... not when there is so much racism, and us/them mentality is still so pervasive... it can;t coalesce in that environment.

The position of being a socialist is growing in the United States, and has manifested itself in the form of Antifa, as just one example.

The division created by (maybe better to say enflamed by) BLM only hurts the Globalist Socialist agenda.

Is not the racial/political division ever more increasing in the United States today? The division will force ordinary individuals to choose a side.

I just reread your OP and it’s all over the place and self-contradictory. Perhaps if you came up with a coherent and concise thesis you could get some by-in.

What is self-contradictory about Ram's initial post?

[jimboston]

This movement is not being led or coordinated by a secret cabal of Globalist Socialists. That premise is ridiculous.

The founders of the Black Lives Matter Movement are professed Marxists. In other words, Revolutionary Communists. Your statement is not factually correct.

Please read the bolded parts of my statement. Thanks.

I am sure there are people who hold a Globalist Socialist view... probably most who hold this view don’t even recognize it as such and certainly wouldn’t label it that way.

Is not socialism at its core a global viewpoint?

Yes, but not in the way most people use the word “Globalist” today.

I don’t think it’s a popular position and won’t manifest anytime soon... not when there is so much racism, and us/them mentality is still so pervasive... it can;t coalesce in that environment.

The position of being a socialist is growing in the United States, and has manifested itself in the form of Antifa, as just one example.

A division and racism also grow... division and racism (and classism) are all opposed to socialism.

The division created by (maybe better to say enflamed by) BLM only hurts the Globalist Socialist agenda.

Is not the racial/political division ever more increasing in the United States today? The division will force ordinary individuals to choose a side.

Yes... and either side is opposed to real Globalist Socialism.

I just reread your OP and it’s all over the place and self-contradictory. Perhaps if you came up with a coherent and concise thesis you could get some by-in.

What is self-contradictory about Ram's initial post?

Read it.

That is my one and only response to you.
You are clearly ‘going after’ me now, which only works when i engage you, so bye.

[Jdsizzleslice]

Please read the bolded parts of my statement. Thanks.

I did read your bolded words. What does that have to do with the fact that BLM is a Marxist movement?

Yes, but not in the way most people use the word “Globalist” today.

So how do people interpret the word globalist? It seems to me as if it has a very clear definition and has extremely low likelyhood of being misinterpreted. I would like to know your opinion on the word.

A division and racism also grow... division and racism (and classism) are all opposed to socialism.

This is actually not correct. Socialist nations are the most racist nations that have existed (Nazi Germany, USSR, Communist China, DPRK, Communist Cuba, etc.). Division and racism are two key elements of extreme socialist/communist societies.

Yes... and either side is opposed to real Globalist Socialism.

I disagree. The Far Left, BLM, and Antifa all are in favor of socialism.

Read it.

Which statement proves there is contradictions? By just reading it, I don't see any contradictions. Which statement shows it? I would like to know your specific opinion on what you see wrong in his statement?

That is my one and only response to you.
You are clearly ‘going after’ me now, which only works when i engage you, so bye.

Not going after you, I reply to many individuals with whom I disagree on these forums. You are certainly no exception.

[The ram]

I made this thread to show how blacks are used by the globalists intent on worldwide Marxism. As per usual in this forum that went way over your heads and you all went down the path that the globalist wants. Preying on your emotions.

The socialist has used black since they found out how white society reacted to the great migration of the late 19th early 20th century. And it has been the same reaction repeated over and over in every single western country that has had large black immigration.

https://youtu.be/GeOKNYSVNck

https://youtu.be/V31g1ruQNXw

Until any of these celebrities, politicians and sports stars actually go and live in black areas, how can their opinions be taken seriously.

The BLM movement and related movements, both agreeing and opposing are used by many different individuals and groups to promote their own agendas. This movement is not being led or coordinated by a secret cabal of Globalist Socialists. That premise is ridiculous. I am sure there are people who hold a Globalist Socialist view... probably most who hold this view don’t even recognize it as such and certainly wouldn’t label it that way. I don’t think it’s a popular position and won’t manifest anytime soon... not when there is so much racism, and us/them mentality is still so pervasive... it can;t coalesce in that environment. The division created by (maybe better to say enflamed by) BLM only hurts the Globalist Socialist agenda.

I just reread your OP and it’s all over the place and self-contradictory. Perhaps if you came up with a coherent and concise thesis you could get some by-in.

Nowhere do I mention a secret globalist cabal, that's your short sited take. I said the UN.

You obviously have no idea about how much power they wield or the direction they force individual governments to take. The MSM is UN approved propaganda, do you think for one moment that we would have heard about the death of a drug addled career criminal, had he been white?

Please point out what you see as self contradiction in the OP. Actually don't bother, I don't have enough time to waste explaining to you that the defunding of police, the end of capitalism and the historical negation are all Marxist.

Seems to me your limitations are arguing with Shimmy the troll about who has the least amount of testosterone.

[jimboston]

I don't have enough time to waste explaining to you that the defunding of police, the end of capitalism and the historical negation are all Marxist.

1) THE STATE (i.e. government in some form) is required in order for a Marxist society to exist.
Without THE STATE individuals would not voluntarily contribute their wealth to other individuals en masse.

The police, or some form of physical enforcement of laws, is/are required by THE STATE in order to exist.
THE STATE cannot maintain power without it... even in societies that have limited regulation or control there must be some form of enforcement.
A Marxist State needs MORE enforcement in order to ensure individuals comply with transfer of wealth.

Ergo a Marxist State would have zero interest in “defunding” the police.
They may defund a specific branch/form of police control... but only if they have an alternate form ready to step in and fill the gap.

2) The end of capitalism is by definition is a requirement/goal of Marxism.
That’s so obvious it’s not worth your effort to type.

3) Historical Negation is a tool used by many many governments. It’s not solely used by Marxists. To clam that is ridiculous.

[The ram]

I don't have enough time to waste explaining to you that the defunding of police, the end of capitalism and the historical negation are all Marxist.

1) THE STATE (i.e. government in some form) is required in order for a Marxist society to exist.
Without THE STATE individuals would not voluntarily contribute their wealth to other individuals en masse.

The police, or some form of physical enforcement of laws, is/are required by THE STATE in order to exist.
THE STATE cannot maintain power without it... even in societies that have limited regulation or control there must be some form of enforcement.
A Marxist State needs MORE enforcement in order to ensure individuals comply with transfer of wealth.

Ergo a Marxist State would have zero interest in “defunding” the police.
They may defund a specific branch/form of police control... but only if they have an alternate form ready to step in and fill the gap.

2) The end of capitalism is by definition is a requirement/goal of Marxism.
That’s so obvious it’s not worth your effort to type.

3) Historical Negation is a tool used by many many governments. It’s not solely used by Marxists. To clam that is ridiculous.

I never said we currently live in a Marxist state. I said the goals of blm and MSM are Marxist. And then, you yourself say that the desire to end capitalism is so obviously Marxist, that it's not worth typing.

Did you see the link I posted regarding the armed blm militia? Guess what they would do if the police were defunded?

You have no foresight and you don't understand how the modern left work. It's a gradual revolution, not the violent revolutions of the past. They've learnt that doesn't work out well, and a better way is to infiltrate positions of power.

At least you have dropped the stoopid accusations of a secret globalist cabal, and I noticed you couldn't back up your mention of the OP being contradictory. We're getting there slowly kidda.

[HitRed]

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6169757886001#sp=show-clips

Sports perspective on BLM

[The ram]

The black KKK aka blm shoot young mother for daring to say the outrageously racist all lives matter

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12102626/ ... -argument/

[jimboston]

I never said we currently live in a Marxist state. I said the goals of blm and MSM are Marxist. And then, you yourself say that the desire to end capitalism is so obviously Marxist, that it's not worth typing.

Did you see the link I posted regarding the armed blm militia? Guess what they would do if the police were defunded?

You have no foresight and you don't understand how the modern left work. It's a gradual revolution, not the violent revolutions of the past. They've learnt that doesn't work out well, and a better way is to infiltrate positions of power.

At least you have dropped the stoopid accusations of a secret globalist cabal, and I noticed you couldn't back up your mention of the OP being contradictory. We're getting there slowly kidda.

I never said it was a secret globalist cabal... i specifically said it wasn’t!

Your posts imply some sort of conspiracy.

Do they all meet in a secret room and plan this out?
Since their ‘leftists’, and not old white men, it can’t be a dark cigar smoke filled room.
What do you imagine?

Did they fake the moon landing too?

[The ram]

I never said we currently live in a Marxist state. I said the goals of blm and MSM are Marxist. And then, you yourself say that the desire to end capitalism is so obviously Marxist, that it's not worth typing.

Did you see the link I posted regarding the armed blm militia? Guess what they would do if the police were defunded?

You have no foresight and you don't understand how the modern left work. It's a gradual revolution, not the violent revolutions of the past. They've learnt that doesn't work out well, and a better way is to infiltrate positions of power.

At least you have dropped the stoopid accusations of a secret globalist cabal, and I noticed you couldn't back up your mention of the OP being contradictory. We're getting there slowly kidda.

I never said it was a secret globalist cabal... i specifically said it wasn’t!

Your posts imply some sort of conspiracy.

Do they all meet in a secret room and plan this out?
Since their ‘leftists’, and not old white men, it can’t be a dark cigar smoke filled room.
What do you imagine?

Did they fake the moon landing too?

The UN want to become a worldwide Marxist government, it's really just that simple. Is agenda 21 a conspiracy theory? I suggest you download it and read it, and remember what year it was formulated.

They use lovely words like diversity is our strength, sustainable development, woke, progressive etc to make simple minded folk feel good and virtuous. Whilst destroying the core principles and cohesion in every western nation.

Look at Britain for example. Never has there been so much division. Feminist against patriarch, young against old, black against white, muslim against Christian, gay against straight, transgender against normal sex, left against right, Muslim against gays, left against Jews etc etc etc. Do you class that as progress, say, compared to a cohesive Britain of 50 year ago?

Now stop going round in circles and shouting conspiracy theorist. I've laid it out in plain English. If you just want some Male attention, I'll make a thread called "The Jimmy and Shimmy trollfest" and you can both have a good reach around till your hearts are content.

[mrswdk]

Wonder what the ram's definition of 'cohesive' is, and how he plans to evidence that it applied to the UK pre-1970.

[The ram]

This movement is paving the way for massive African immigration on a scale you can't imagine.. You won't be able to object because it's racist,

[jimboston]

Is agenda 21 a conspiracy theory?

Agenda 21 is real. What you and your fellow Conspiracy Theorists claim it states / its’ goal.. that’s the Conspiracy Theory.

You didn’t answer my question...?
- Is the Moon Landing a fake?
- Do we live on a flat pizza-shaped earth?

Look at Britain for example. Never has there been so much division. Feminist against patriarch, young against old, black against white, muslim against Christian, gay against straight, transgender against normal sex, left against right, Muslim against gays, left against Jews etc etc etc. Do you class that as progress, say, compared to a cohesive Britain of 50 year ago?

1) 50 years ago in Britain there was plenty of unrest. Labor Unrest and issues talked to Ireland jump out... if you go a bit further when Britain was still a World Empire you would find even more unrest in the colonial possessions. The idea that Britain was some peaceful utopia in 1970 is ridiculous.

https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2649-w ... rn-britain
http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/ ... race-riots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

This is just a 1 minute search... i’m sure if we dug deeper and looked at British papers circa 1970 we’d see plenty of issues.

2) Please explain to me how the UN or Agenda 21 or the Freemasons would plan to utilize unrest and racial/sex-based/religious social disharmony as the basis for one-world government and ‘one’ people? It’s counter-intuitive and not practical. If they sow the discord you are suggesting they are sowing then you will NEVER be able to form a unified gov’t because people will have isolated themselves into a bunch of “Us and Them” groups.

The way to a one-world gov’t (be it Capitalist, Socialist, or Something Else) is through social harmony and the recognition that we really are all one race and we are all people, who mostly all want the same (basic) things from life.

3) If we as humans ever do ‘evolve’ to a place where we can accept other humans as our equals, then what would be so bad about a “one world gov’t”?

If you asked people 2000 or 20,0000 years ago they would think the other people living 100-1000 miles away were “a different race” or at the very least “a different people” who “think differently and have strange customs”. Those people would never believe that a piece of land as large as the US would. be considered “one country” with “one people”. (Yes, I know some people now don’t believe that.)

The point is, we humans evolve and as we evolve in our thinking and understanding of the world/universe we live in, it’s not unreasonable to believe that one-world gov’t is coming. I don’t think it’s happening tomorrow, I don’t think there’s a ‘secret plot’ to force us there quicker, but I do think it’s happening. (I could see movement this century, but I doubt we’ll get a true ‘world gov’t’ in my lifetime.)

[mrswdk]

Wonder what the ram's definition of 'cohesive' is, and how he plans to evidence that it applied to the UK pre-1970.

This movement is paving the way for massive African immigration on a scale you can't imagine.. You won't be able to object because it's racist,

So your definition is 'cohesive' is 'doesn't have lots of African immigration'?

[The ram]

Is agenda 21 a conspiracy theory?

Agenda 21 is real. What you and your fellow Conspiracy Theorists claim it states / its’ goal.. that’s the Conspiracy Theory.

You didn’t answer my question...?
- Is the Moon Landing a fake?
- Do we live on a flat pizza-shaped earth?

Look at Britain for example. Never has there been so much division. Feminist against patriarch, young against old, black against white, muslim against Christian, gay against straight, transgender against normal sex, left against right, Muslim against gays, left against Jews etc etc etc. Do you class that as progress, say, compared to a cohesive Britain of 50 year ago?

1) 50 years ago in Britain there was plenty of unrest. Labor Unrest and issues talked to Ireland jump out... if you go a bit further when Britain was still a World Empire you would find even more unrest in the colonial possessions. The idea that Britain was some peaceful utopia in 1970 is ridiculous.

https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2649-w ... rn-britain
http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/ ... race-riots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

This is just a 1 minute search... i’m sure if we dug deeper and looked at British papers circa 1970 we’d see plenty of issues.

2) Please explain to me how the UN or Agenda 21 or the Freemasons would plan to utilize unrest and racial/sex-based/religious social disharmony as the basis for one-world government and ‘one’ people? It’s counter-intuitive and not practical. If they sow the discord you are suggesting they are sowing then you will NEVER be able to form a unified gov’t because people will have isolated themselves into a bunch of “Us and Them” groups.

The way to a one-world gov’t (be it Capitalist, Socialist, or Something Else) is through social harmony and the recognition that we really are all one race and we are all people, who mostly all want the same (basic) things from life.

3) If we as humans ever do ‘evolve’ to a place where we can accept other humans as our equals, then what would be so bad about a “one world gov’t”?

If you asked people 2000 or 20,0000 years ago they would think the other people living 100-1000 miles away were “a different race” or at the very least “a different people” who “think differently and have strange customs”. Those people would never believe that a piece of land as large as the US would. be considered “one country” with “one people”. (Yes, I know some people now don’t believe that.)

The point is, we humans evolve and as we evolve in our thinking and understanding of the world/universe we live in, it’s not unreasonable to believe that one-world gov’t is coming. I don’t think it’s happening tomorrow, I don’t think there’s a ‘secret plot’ to force us there quicker, but I do think it’s happening. (I could see movement this century, but I doubt we’ll get a true ‘world gov’t’ in my lifetime.)

What do all of those 'minorities' have in common? Which side of the political fence are they on?

The 70s was a difficult period for virtually all of the western countries. The shortage of oil for one affected employment and the end of heavy industry
You could find articles from any country ( not that I read any that you posted) saying exactly the same thing.

So we had terrorism from the IRA during the 70s. Well there were answers to that problem, and by the 90s it was virtually non existent. The left have imported a perpetual terrorist problem.

So you think that a one world government would be good? Who will they be accountable to? Who could stop anything they decided would be for the best? It's called tyranny, you fool.

The earth is round. I've never thought about the moon landings but I do believe that before long there will be humans living on Mars.

[The ram]

Wonder what the ram's definition of 'cohesive' is, and how he plans to evidence that it applied to the UK pre-1970.

This movement is paving the way for massive African immigration on a scale you can't imagine.. You won't be able to object because it's racist,

So your definition is 'cohesive' is 'doesn't have lots of African immigration'?

China certainly doesn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africans_in_Guangzhou

[mrswdk]

I see you still need a little practice at giving direct answers to questions.

[The ram]

Emirates, Abu Dhabi, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Dubai, Phuket. Probably the best places in Asia to live. Do you know what they all have in common?

Detroit on the other hand.

[mrswdk]

tfw the ram thinks Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and the UAE aren't diverse and/or full of immigrants:

[The ram]

tfw the ram thinks Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and the UAE aren't diverse and/or full of immigrants:

Had to quote this one Shimmy. You rushed in a bit quickly. Now I'm going to ask again, what have they all got in common? I gave you the answer cryptically, being the opposite of Detroit.

[mrswdk]

Maybe if you weren't such a wimp you'd just say what you mean directly instead of playing this weird Riddle-Me-Symmetry game.