“From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.” It is an idea so old that millions of young Americans who voted for Barack Obama have never heard of it before, and believe it to be the CHANGE they have been awaiting. Obama Redefines Marxism.
Are not we Americans civilized? Georgia Democrat Congressman John Lewis told Charlie Gibson on ABC News, what Republicans and McCain supporters already knew would be the case if Obama were elected. The Democrat gushed that the election of Barack Obama was “a nonviolent revolution” and an “unbelievable, and unreal transformation of American politics.“
So that is why jubilant students from Georgetown University stormed across the bridge into Washington, DC to the White House, and for the first time in history, screamed and shouted while wearing “Hammer & Sickle” tee shirts and waving a “Hammer & Sickle” banner adorned with the Red Star of Communism. You can always depend upon those Georgetown drunks to know which way the wind’s a-blowing, as they have their own very own Weatherman, Billy Ayers, who has been on the job since the 1970s. Is this the beginning of a youth movement to change the Stars and Stripes to a Hammer & Sickle? (America Waves the Hammer & Sickle.)
The image, Nothing to Lose But Your Change, is subject to copyright by randomridge. It is posted here with permission via the Flickr API by barneykin.
Save This Page
It predates Marx, but nice try. It was the way the first Christians lived.
Acts 4:35
And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
Comment by Bobby — November 5, 2008 @ 9:39 pm
Don’t try and rewrite history. You are ABSOLUTELY wrong! The statement is from Karl Marx’s Critique of the Gotha Program. Look it up, before you try and claim it’s from the Bible.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” –Karl Marx, 1875
Christianity speaks to voluntary contributions used for the needy; a far cry from state-forced Communism and Socialism which has government confiscating from the people and using the proceeds however government wants. Oftentimes they buy votes, pay themselves and their friends, and the needy are usually shortshifted.
Christianity does NOT teach thievery of the rich. Karl Marx got his beloved creed from Robin Hood, not from the Bible.
Comment by Kerfuffles — November 5, 2008 @ 10:59 pm
32And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
33And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.
34Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
35And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
That is the book of Acts, not a rewriting of History. This particular quote is from the King James Version, itself predating Marx.
Comment by Bobby — November 6, 2008 @ 9:21 am
Taxes on the rich are no greater theft than taxes on the poor. Taxing the rich for a poor mans healthcare is no different than taxing a poor man for the fire truck putting out a fire in a mansion.
Comment by Bobby — November 6, 2008 @ 9:23 am
Bobby - Any Christians in America should be free to practice those beliefs from the Bible which you have published. They should not be permitted to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of the country. Guess what? Everyone in America is not a Christian! Guess what? Even most of the Christians in America choose not to follow these teachings of Christianity for themselves.
You are correct about taxes on the income of the poor being theft. Confiscating taxes on anyone’s income is theft - whether rich or poor.
There are other ways to raise taxes to run the government without resorting to stealing money from people’s pay checks. The U.S. Congress prefers to confiscate income and call it taxes.
Comment by Kerfuffles — November 6, 2008 @ 10:18 am
Bobby - you are spouting ideas right out of the Communist playbook. Tell the people that Communism is good because it is from the Bible. Ask the people of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe just how Christian and good Communism was for them?
Bobby - since you have quoted from the Christian playbook for living in a commune, can you cite any Christians in history who have been successful in living this way? I can think of the Shakers in America perhaps, but they did not survive. I had a religion professor in college who described his attempts to do so with a group of devout Christian families. They soon discovered that it could not work, as they were not as Christian nor as holy as they had hoped to be or thought they were. I have spent time as a visitor at a Hindu Ashram where they seem to be successfully implementing this way of life, but I am not sure how closely the Ashram follows the playbook from the Acts of the Apostles.
To choose to live one’s life in accord to one’s religious beliefs is one thing. To be forced to follow the religious or political beliefs of someone in authority, is quite another thing. The first way of life is FREEDOM; the second is SLAVERY. Communism is SLAVERY.
Comment by Kerfuffles — November 6, 2008 @ 10:21 am
I doubt any were sucessful. But there are some things that are better off they are socialized. Ask the Russians, who had a 20 year drop in Life expectancy after the collapse of the Soviet Union, or any of the countries that have universal healthcare, such as Canada, with its life expectancy over 80.
In a system that is not optimal, you should do the best you can. Some of us are simply tired of seeing people suffer and die because of economic conditions. It is a shame in a country like this.
You can hold your ideology all you want, as more and more Americans become educated to the world around them, they will stop setting for short thrift, and start voting their interests because they are more aware of the possibilities. So many who espouse these doctrines have obviously never known sick people, poor people, or people who just work to live. To know these people and say their situation is justified makes their opinions not worth considering, because quite frankly, they are ethically and morally inferior when it comes to the human race. A nation with some bad freeloaders is better than a nation full of people who spend their lives making money on perverse incentives.
No one is taking your freedom. If you are the government, you can’t be a slave. Its the banks to whom you are a slave.
Ability does not factor into the equation nearly as much as geography and family. So taking from someones ability to “get lucky” and land a six figure job in a northern state that pays 40k in a southern state isn’t really taking from someones ability. Its taking from their demographic luck.
Comment by Bobby — November 6, 2008 @ 9:55 pm
The former American government had always been available to help those who cannot help themselves, as it should. It was the legacy from Colonial days when the local parish (CHURCH) was charged with that responsiblity. Few people in the former America believed it justified for people to be poor and sick. It is sad that you have been educated to believe that about your fellow countrymen who are the most generous people in the world.
You have also been educated to think that those with six figure incomes are just “lucky,” instead of realizing that most of them are reaping the benefits of hard work. Because you believe it is just “luck” you consider it fairness to “force” them to “share” what they earned with everyone. Somehow, your side has convinced the masses that this is not Socialism, or Communism, but just plain old Christianity. So we are all CHRISTIANS now, by force.
You are correct Bobby, about this nation’s change to your views. Almost all young Americans believe as you do, not as I believe. The more education they have, the stronger their beliefs in Marxism. Isn’t that interesting? They are the future of the Obama Nation. That is why I named this post “Bloodless Revolution.” There will be no turning back in my lifetime. So, because, as you say, the people of Russia are more miserable today then they were under the Communist Soviet Union, that is why college students in the Obama Nation are now waving the Hammer & Sickle.
Comment by Kerfuffles — November 7, 2008 @ 8:04 am