Very correct in his warnings about blindly following the so-called news reporting by the main-stream media.

However, very one-sided in his analysis of Cuba under Fidel Castro.  Prior to Castro, the narrator neglects to mentioned how President Batista of Cuba took power with support of the CIA and whose domestic pro-US Corporation policies impoverished the majority of the Cuban people, which led to socio-economic conditions that allowed Castro to successfully take control of that country.


Kuleana

Hard to find the perfect counter to liberal lies so an imperfect spokesperson will have to do for now, much like Trump. At least this video shows definitively the false narrative being promoted right now about Castro.

The left would love to push that communist socialism down our throats.  It's no deep disguise anymore.  The amount of love this dictator receives in the comment sections of our local media is utterly disgusting....

I really do not think the so-called left-leaning main-stream media outlets who writes favorable pieces for Fidel Castro are truly sincere.  They are probably trying to once again distract the populace with Castro while strategizing how they can earn credibility from their ever dwindling viewership from their recent total fraudulent and misleading media campaign to get Hillary Clinton elected to the presidency of the US.


Kuleana

Actually, if you look at the statements by Obama and even some other world "leaders" you can see they are serious about praising Castro and even want to sell the idea to the public of adopting these wonderful communist, I mean progressive socialist, concepts.

I am very familiar of such progressive/socialists statements made by such people.  However, how do you know they actually mean what they say?  For example, President Obama says he does not like wars, yet he has engaged in acts of internationally illegal military aggression during his administration.

More telling is the fact that many fifthly rich 1%-ters always donate money to these people.  I find it hard to believe that these ultra-rich capitalists would donate money to any political leader advocating socialist ideas (e.g., Obama, Hillary, etc.).


Kuleana

The scam of communism is that when the regime is established, the masses will be controlled by it but the oligarchy will reign in secret luxury. This would be the donors, family and friends.

Based on your analysis then, socialism/communism is not the root of the problem.  The problem is the capitalist oligopolistic ultra-wealthy, who maintains the free-market to operate for themselves, but leaves whatever is left over to be distributed to the masses via socialist or communist means.  If this is the situation, the battle the masses face then is against the ultra-wealthy.

Consequently, capitalism for the rich and communism for the poor!


Kuleana

Not exactly.

The threat is from POWERFUL people who are ALSO CORRUPT.

Money gives you power. Ultra money gives you ultra power.

Powerless people who are corrupt can't do much.

This is why we need laws from our Constitution to protect the Republic from said corrupt efforts by powerful people.

Currently, the commie narrative is positioning us to be mad against the rich people. This is COMPLETELY THE SAME as every single commie revolution in the past. They get you mad at the "rich guys" and then everyone plunders the wealth, and then next up they kill all the "evil intellectuals" (teachers, thinkers, writers). Now the slate is clean for the oligarchy to impose "equality" laws that ensure all the masses are equally poor (and equally ignorant, since nobody dares speak up anymore against lies), while pretending to live under the same laws that they create.

China's Mao, North Korea's Kim, are very typical of this (both those guys live/lived like royalty; Mao had a harem of mistresses like a king, etc.).

Not exactly.

The threat is from POWERFUL people who are ALSO CORRUPT.

No matter what time in history, the most powerful people in any society were most likely corrupt.


Money gives you power. Ultra money gives you ultra power.

Correct, but here is the issue you seem to dodge; those who accumulate power through their possession of money either acquired it hereditary or by legal or illegal capitalist means.


Powerless people who are corrupt can't do much.

Correct; corruption is a function of money.  Hard to be corrupt when one does not have any money.


This is why we need laws from our Constitution to protect the Republic from said corrupt efforts by powerful people.

I 100% agree.


Currently, the commie narrative is positioning us to be mad against the rich people. This is COMPLETELY THE SAME as every single commie revolution in the past. They get you mad at the "rich guys" and then everyone plunders the wealth, and then next up they kill all the "evil intellectuals" (teachers, thinkers, writers). Now the slate is clean for the oligarchy to impose "equality" laws that ensure all the masses are equally poor (and equally ignorant, since nobody dares speak up anymore against lies), while pretending to live under the same laws that they create.

The notion for the masses to get upset at the rich people is the natural logical response when the power elite has upset the proper wealth distribution healthy for any particular society.  Since you already established that "ultra money gives you ultra-power", who else is to blame for the social-economic woes of a country that is riddled with corruption?

Do you think those corrupt politicians, wealthy financiers and bankers, and organized crime in the US will just cease their unscrupulous ways to benefit society or follow the US Constitution to the letter?


China's Mao, North Korea's Kim, are very typical of this (both those guys live/lived like royalty; Mao had a harem of mistresses like a king, etc.).

Correct, but China seems to be poised to be the World's leader in GDP with their version of socialism.


Kuleana

Exactly. No country in the world is like the United States.  Though there is corruption at the highest power levels, there is also a route to keep this corruption in check.  The 'progressive' movement seeks to remove all such checks and render the PEOPLE neutered to remove such corruption.  They spout and praise such tyrannical commie killers as gods and saviours of the impoverished 'class'  when the truth is that this nations constitution, in it raw form, throws "class" of the citizenry out the window. "All men are created equal", or people in PC terms, is the foundation of this country. Even though there are problems here, there is avenues to bring country back to greatness.   The 'progressive' left seeks to abolish that to consolidate their power. 

Capitalism is not the enemy. The left and their 'tolerance' is.  BACK TO THE CONSTITUTION is the route to freedom.

Divide and conquer has been the modus operandi of the commies.

Because it works and keeps working.

Always be mindful of what is going on. Are they trying to divide me with other Americans to weaken us?

Division by race, gender, wealth, sexual behavior, politics (of course), jobs, etc. including division by religion. This latter area is tricky. Extremism in all forms is to be fought. Otherwise, if a citizen is not infringing on the rights of other people, he or she should be left alone. You can think all you want about killing infidels. But if you ACT on it, that's a different matter.

So, laws need to be made to precisely neutralize this increasing concentration of power which seems likely to corrupt absolutely.

Ideally, but unfortunately, there is no law that can be made to protect people from other people's lust for power and money.


The Bill of Rights is supposed to do that but perhaps underestimated the influence of mass media when it can be controlled and wielded. Modern mass media is very powerful, compared to printed papers 250 years ago.

Exactly, but the point to be emphasized here is that only the wealthy have the financial means to control mass media.


Arbitrarily limiting a person's wealth seems too coarse a measure to me. We are supposed to have a debt ceiling too.

Societies that had free-markets always had wealth control policies to prevent any one person from acquiring all the wealth of their nation, taxation.  However, corruption has become so sophisticated that the ultra-wealthy have found quasi-legal means to avoid taxation altogether.  Hence, the only other option governments can do to prevent any one person or corporation from accumulating wealth that takes away real economic opportunities from the rest of society is to impose some new form of wealth limitation/taxation that does not allow for the formation of loop holes.

For example, the same mathematical calculations that are done to estimate the dollar value of a particular industry can also be used to determine/predict the absolute maximum any one company in that industry should be making.  Anything above that amount would be taxed back into society.  The point of this system would be to prevent the formation of billionaire oligopolies and/or monopolies to make possible common Americans to become self-made millionaires.

The only differences between the example above and today's tax system is that the rates/amounts/limits on wealth are all mathematically calculated and not politically legislated.


Kuleana