Quote:
Originally Posted by ebacon
She said she was anti-communist, but nothing she did would suggest that's true. For example the link above cites her newsletter where she railed against Reagan and supported labor -- labor in that context means working with the hands.
The communist movement is a labor movement. Since the US is generally a capitalist nation she could not help implement communism by saying that's what she was doing. Instead she had to be subversive.
Remember that the Communist manifesto provides a basic roadmap to communism.
1) Create a great divide between the haves and have nots.
2) Make them fight each other
3) Communism steps in to save the day
Ayn Rand was instrumental in step 1). The neocons, with their roots in the radical left, are working on step 2).
There is some debate as to whether step 3) is done. It depends on whether one considers the NYC/DC i.e. corporate/government relationship, a master over wealth allocation in the nation. I think they are and that we are close enough to being communists to call it that. The neocons would take it further.
|
So you see her as double agent. I do not agree with everything you say Ebacon but you do make one think about the world in different ways....
I have always seen communism as sort of way for a few to fool the many, as in Animal Farm where everyone is equal but some are more equal than others....of course the same outcome can occur from extreme neo-conservatism or fascism