On 2021 Jan 25, , Boron Elgar wrote
(in >):

> Bovard is hardly a neutral source, which you should comprehend before
> recommending him, and with a tiny bit of reading yourself, maybe 10
> minutes' worth, you'd know that Marxism and Communism, as political
> philosophies, are rather delightful, but when used as title only for
> populist, despotic or dictatorial regimes with wholly differing
> practices, millions get killed.

The point, which you missed, was a hundred-million dead under various Marxist
philosophies. I never heard of Bovard until I quick googled for dead people
under Marxism and settled on the link. Do you deny the count? Should I
re-google?
The "delightful philosophy" of Marx assumes equality of birth, intelligence
and ambition, much like worker bees or ants. None of that is true for a
single human being ever born.Marxism, in any form, will never be done right.
Individuals simply don´t work that way.

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:21:22 -0800, Leo >
wrote:

>On 2021 Jan 25, , Boron Elgar wrote
>(in >):
>
>> Bovard is hardly a neutral source, which you should comprehend before
>> recommending him, and with a tiny bit of reading yourself, maybe 10
>> minutes' worth, you'd know that Marxism and Communism, as political
>> philosophies, are rather delightful, but when used as title only for
>> populist, despotic or dictatorial regimes with wholly differing
>> practices, millions get killed.
>
>The point, which you missed, was a hundred-million dead under various Marxist
>philosophies. I never heard of Bovard until I quick googled for dead people
>under Marxism and settled on the link. Do you deny the count? Should I
>re-google?
>The "delightful philosophy" of Marx assumes equality of birth, intelligence
>and ambition, much like worker bees or ants. None of that is true for a
>single human being ever born.Marxism, in any form, will never be done right.
>Individuals simply don´t work that way.

Apart from blaming Marx for all those dead people, I agree with you.
Where you go wrong is when you think that your Democratic party has
anything to do with Marxism, socialism or communism. That's you buying
into shock jock drivel and over the top right-wing spin. It's mass
hysteria.

On 2021 Jan 27, , Master Bruce wrote
(in >):

> Apart from blaming Marx for all those dead people, I agree with you.
> Where you go wrong is when you think that your Democratic party has
> anything to do with Marxism, socialism or communism. That's you buying
> into shock jock drivel and over the top right-wing spin. It's mass
> hysteria.

You´re not speaking like a lumpenprole. Reevaluate yourself. I will be
folding early tonight.

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 18:14:42 -0800, Leo >
wrote:

>On 2021 Jan 27, , Master Bruce wrote
>(in >):
>
>> Apart from blaming Marx for all those dead people, I agree with you.
>> Where you go wrong is when you think that your Democratic party has
>> anything to do with Marxism, socialism or communism. That's you buying
>> into shock jock drivel and over the top right-wing spin. It's mass
>> hysteria.
>
>You´re not speaking like a lumpenprole.

Maybe I should address you as guv'nor or squire. And drop the master.

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:21:22 -0800, Leo >
wrote:

>On 2021 Jan 25, , Boron Elgar wrote
>(in >):
>
>> Bovard is hardly a neutral source, which you should comprehend before
>> recommending him, and with a tiny bit of reading yourself, maybe 10
>> minutes' worth, you'd know that Marxism and Communism, as political
>> philosophies, are rather delightful, but when used as title only for
>> populist, despotic or dictatorial regimes with wholly differing
>> practices, millions get killed.
>
>The point, which you missed, was a hundred-million dead under various Marxist
>philosophies.

Nope. Not Marxist philosophies at all. Dictatorships who liked to use
the term, even though it did not apply. Kinda like the dumb****s who
go around calling the Nazis socialists.

>I never heard of Bovard until I quick googled for dead people
>under Marxism and settled on the link. Do you deny the count? Should I
>re-google?

I deny the claim. No need to verify a number of a false statement, eh?

>The "delightful philosophy" of Marx assumes equality of birth, intelligence
>and ambition, much like worker bees or ants. None of that is true for a
>single human being ever born.

Nor is that claimed by Marx.

>Marxism, in any form, will never be done right.
>Individuals simply don´t work that way.

It ain't been tried.

Since you seem to know dick-squat about any of this, why do you keep
blabbering?

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 21:23:53 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote:

>On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:21:22 -0800, Leo >
>wrote:
>
>>The point, which you missed, was a hundred-million dead under various Marxist
>>philosophies.
>
>Nope. Not Marxist philosophies at all. Dictatorships who liked to use
>the term, even though it did not apply. Kinda like the dumb****s who
>go around calling the Nazis socialists.
>
>>I never heard of Bovard until I quick googled for dead people
>>under Marxism and settled on the link. Do you deny the count? Should I
>>re-google?
>
>I deny the claim. No need to verify a number of a false statement, eh?
>
>>The "delightful philosophy" of Marx assumes equality of birth, intelligence
>>and ambition, much like worker bees or ants. None of that is true for a
>>single human being ever born.
>
>Nor is that claimed by Marx.
>
>>Marxism, in any form, will never be done right.
>>Individuals simply don´t work that way.
>
>It ain't been tried.
>
>Since you seem to know dick-squat about any of this, why do you keep
>blabbering?

I think "Marxist" is a new buzz word for the right. Everything they
don't like is now "Marxist". They don't understand the word, but
repeat it anyway. Leo is the second person in RFC to throw that word
around. I wonder where this started.

On Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 9:41:38 PM UTC-5, Master Bruce wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 21:23:53 -0500, Boron Elgar
> > wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:21:22 -0800, Leo >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>The point, which you missed, was a hundred-million dead under various Marxist
> >>philosophies.
> >
> >Nope. Not Marxist philosophies at all. Dictatorships who liked to use
> >the term, even though it did not apply. Kinda like the dumb****s who
> >go around calling the Nazis socialists.
> >
> >>I never heard of Bovard until I quick googled for dead people
> >>under Marxism and settled on the link. Do you deny the count? Should I
> >>re-google?
> >
> >I deny the claim. No need to verify a number of a false statement, eh?
> >
> >>The "delightful philosophy" of Marx assumes equality of birth, intelligence
> >>and ambition, much like worker bees or ants. None of that is true for a
> >>single human being ever born.
> >
> >Nor is that claimed by Marx.
> >
> >>Marxism, in any form, will never be done right.
> >>Individuals simply don´t work that way.
> >
> >It ain't been tried.
> >
> >Since you seem to know dick-squat about any of this, why do you keep
> >blabbering?
> I think "Marxist" is a new buzz word for the right. Everything they
> don't like is now "Marxist". They don't understand the word, but
> repeat it anyway. Leo is the second person in RFC to throw that word
> around. I wonder where this started.

Take your pick. Fox News, OANN, Newsmax, Breitbart, ad infinitum.

Cindy Hamilton

On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 01:49:57 -0800 (PST), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 9:41:38 PM UTC-5, Master Bruce wrote:

>> I think "Marxist" is a new buzz word for the right. Everything they
>> don't like is now "Marxist". They don't understand the word, but
>> repeat it anyway. Leo is the second person in RFC to throw that word
>> around. I wonder where this started.
>
>Take your pick. Fox News, OANN, Newsmax, Breitbart, ad infinitum.

But do these disgruntled, uneducated whites listen to all that? Yes,
Fox News maybe, but the rest? Or maybe also local shock jocks.

On Thursday, January 28, 2021 at 5:18:22 AM UTC-5, Master Bruce wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 01:49:57 -0800 (PST), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 9:41:38 PM UTC-5, Master Bruce wrote:
>
> >> I think "Marxist" is a new buzz word for the right. Everything they
> >> don't like is now "Marxist". They don't understand the word, but
> >> repeat it anyway. Leo is the second person in RFC to throw that word
> >> around. I wonder where this started.
> >
> >Take your pick. Fox News, OANN, Newsmax, Breitbart, ad infinitum.
> But do these disgruntled, uneducated whites listen to all that? Yes,
> Fox News maybe, but the rest? Or maybe also local shock jocks.

Disgruntled, uneducated whites have a nearly constant stream of Fox News
on televisions in salons, bars, and other workplaces. In the car they have
talk radio, which is where the right-wing media really got its start. Their
local television station is likely owned by Sinclair, so they get another dose
if they watch the evening news.

Cindy Hamilton

On 2021 Jan 27, , Boron Elgar wrote
(in >):

> Since you seem to know dick-squat about any of this, why do you keep
> blabbering?

I´ll put my knowledge of 19th and 20th Century history up against yours any
day. And by the way, chemists don´t usually use foul language on Usenet. At
least, I don´t. I have posted "Well, sh*t", but that doesn´t spell
anything.

On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 06:13:05 -0800, Leo >
wrote:

>On 2021 Jan 27, , Boron Elgar wrote
>(in >):
>
>> Since you seem to know dick-squat about any of this, why do you keep
>> blabbering?
>
>I´ll put my knowledge of 19th and 20th Century history up against yours any
>day. And by the way, chemists don´t usually use foul language on Usenet. At
>least, I don´t. I have posted "Well, sh*t", but that doesn´t spell
>anything.

You should reread about Germany in the 30s and see if, by any chance,
it applies to yourself.

On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 06:13:05 -0800, Leo >
wrote:

>On 2021 Jan 27, , Boron Elgar wrote
>(in >):
>
>> Since you seem to know dick-squat about any of this, why do you keep
>> blabbering?
>
>I´ll put my knowledge of 19th and 20th Century history up against yours any
>day.

You'd lose. Sorry, sugar.

>And by the way, chemists don´t usually use foul language on Usenet. At
>least, I don´t. I have posted "Well, sh*t", but that doesn´t spell
>anything.

I don't give a **** what you think of my word choices. Only an asshole
would.

On 2021-01-27 8:21 p.m., Leo wrote:
> On 2021 Jan 25, , Boron Elgar wrote
> (in >):
>
>> Bovard is hardly a neutral source, which you should comprehend before
>> recommending him, and with a tiny bit of reading yourself, maybe 10
>> minutes' worth, you'd know that Marxism and Communism, as political
>> philosophies, are rather delightful, but when used as title only for
>> populist, despotic or dictatorial regimes with wholly differing
>> practices, millions get killed.
>
> The point, which you missed, was a hundred-million dead under various Marxist
> philosophies. I never heard of Bovard until I quick googled for dead people
> under Marxism and settled on the link. Do you deny the count? Should I
> re-google?
> The "delightful philosophy" of Marx assumes equality of birth, intelligence
> and ambition, much like worker bees or ants. None of that is true for a
> single human being ever born.Marxism, in any form, will never be done right.
> Individuals simply don´t work that way.
>
>
Right wing governments have been pretty good at slaughtering people too.
The Nazis were responsible for the killing at least 6 million Jews,
Gypsies homosexuals, intellects and others who they considered to be
undesirable. They also killed millions in combat.The Japanese
slaughtered roughly 300,000 in Nanking alone. Nationalist Chinese
killed more than a million soldiers and another million civilians during
the civil war. In Spain there were about 5 times as many Communists
killed than right wingers. About 140,000 Spanish "disappeared" after
their civil war. There were as many as a million leftists killed in
Indonesia. Hundreds of thousands have been killed in central and south
America.

You may or may not be right about the 100 million killed by communist
regimes. They may or may not have killed more people than the right
wingers. They left may have killed more people than the right, but
neither side holds a monopoly.

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 21:26:55 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>Right wing governments have been pretty good at slaughtering people too.
>The Nazis were responsible for the killing at least 6 million Jews,
>Gypsies homosexuals, intellects and others who they considered to be
>undesirable. They also killed millions in combat.The Japanese
>slaughtered roughly 300,000 in Nanking alone. Nationalist Chinese
>killed more than a million soldiers and another million civilians during
>the civil war. In Spain there were about 5 times as many Communists
>killed than right wingers. About 140,000 Spanish "disappeared" after
>their civil war. There were as many as a million leftists killed in
>Indonesia. Hundreds of thousands have been killed in central and south
>America.
>
>You may or may not be right about the 100 million killed by communist
>regimes. They may or may not have killed more people than the right
>wingers. They left may have killed more people than the right, but
>neither side holds a monopoly.

Of course, a dictatorship isn't a communist regime, even if it calls
itself that. What is true, though, is that every communist regime
sooner or later became a dictatorship.