Reviews for PC Censorship
darkershadeofpale chapter 1 . 1/15/2012
I'm not at all good with American politics (so while I can follow the train of thought here and agree that the whole thing is a little bit ridiculous, I'm not educated enough to actually be able to offer anything constructive. Sorry).

But the one thing I did notice, is that you're arguing that communists and Marxists are the same people: They're actually rather far from it. Communism is a derivative of Marxism, and an interpretation (of which there are many) of some of the things that Marx wrote. Marx hiself was a fairly prolific writer, and so, while there are accepted definitions of Marxism that are used depending on what you're referring to in the political sphere, saying that communism and marxism are synonymous is probably not exactly correct. Unless I'm horrendously misinformed, which is possible. Also, the word 'communism' has now been attached to a lot of things that have distinctly pejorative connotations, which don't (at all) align with Marxism. The Soviets (well, mostly Stalin) claimed to be Marxist, but were actually rampantly dictatorial and totally ignored half of Marx's core ideals. Basically, what I think I'm saying here, is that you can call some communists Marxists, and some Marxists communists, but the label is not all encompassing, and it depends very much on the 'some' in question.

I think this made sense.

. darker shade of pale
William G. Thorne chapter 1 . 12/8/2011
its somewhat of a "rose by any other name" kind of thing. It may be called something different but it is what it is, theres no denying that. You can call a pile of crap a masterpiece but its still a pile of crap. a Communist is a communist, no matter if its re-worded Marxist. I do find it amusing that Obama seems to support these violent children, maybe he is blind sighted to the riots and only wishes to see the actual peaceful protestors. he is possibly in denial himself that they are protesting him as well.

This whole situation could have been handled much better than it has been.. thats for sure.
Stewart MacDonald chapter 1 . 12/6/2011
Yeah, Oswald was definitely a Communist. Which was why he had a Department of Defense Iientification card. And he wasn't FROM the Soviet Union, he 'defected' from the States and strangely was admitted back into the US during the height of the Cold War with little to no hassle whatsoever AFTER he supposedly defected, and was allowed to be a radar operator for the US Military for most of his life. Anyone else trying that would've been interrogated for months. And he DEFINITELY shot Kennedy, even though the rifle he was apparently using had a crooked sight, a bolt-action that would make him firing off all those shots in the time frame impossible, he had no GSR on his hands, and there was a fully leaf-coated tree in the path of where he supposedly shot from and the Presidential motorcade, which combined with the crooked sight and the fact that Oswalds military records show him to be a bad shot, would've made such an action PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE, even if he was a professional marksman.

If you're going to speak against censorship, how about how the version of the Zapruder film shown to the public, which shows Kennedy being shot from a different direction than Oswald was reputed to be at, was doctored by the Warren Comission to show Kennedy falling the OTHER way after being shot? That seems to be a little bit more serious censorship than telling people not to say gay, no? Tampering with physical evidence? How about how many witnesses which saw uniformed men with guns fleeing the scene ended up dead? How about how Kennedy's brain, which would have provided key evidence to Oswald's innocence in firing shots that day, completely vanished without a trace while in the care of the men who would've had the most to gain by his death? How about how men that Kennedy had fired before his death were present at his autopsy?

I also love how quick you are to demonize communism, which I agree is a terrible way to run a government, as history has shown us, but is Capitalism any better? A system that is, in a nut-shell, the dollar over the soul? Self-indulgence over selflessness? It's not a question of political leanings that make me disagree with capitalism, it's a question of basic right and wrong. When developmentalist politics began to cause huge amounts of reform in Latin America, pulling them out of economic inequality and creating the largest middle class seen there before or since, Capitalist idealists institiude programs to basically convert Chilean students into believing that, while their countries where prospering, the developmentalism was 'wrong' and should dissuaded. This was because, the very core of these reforms was relying on nationalist industry instead of succumbing to the import products and industries of the states, and costing large corporations money. Is that what you call right, and better than communism? A system that thinks it has free reign to undermine countries who are prospering because a few already filthy rich corporations will lose a few dollars?

I agree with some of the ironies about PC censorship, but it seems you're disregarding the fact that the knife cuts both ways. Like how nobody's talking about the oil-spill anymore, how songs about peace and equality are drowned out by songs promoting materialism and apathy, how almost nobody talks about the Bush family's relationship with the Bin Laden's? How photographs of the conflict in Libya were blatantly staged, (A shot of Tripoli in the London Free Press, a local newspaper, shot supposedly during the height of combat shows a pristine background, with no smoke, damage or signs of combat visible at all.) And how instead of taking a Bin Laden alive and interrogating him he was killed without hesitation? How about how NBC and several other large media mediums are actually funded and founded by the military? How about radio being a military invention? I think you need to do your homework before you make certain statements. But, oh right, physical evidence means nothing to the word of the government, right? So I'm probably guilty of treason for believing in facts over people who have proven themselves both corrupt and dishonest through theit own actions and the facts themselves. I could go on for hours, but I think I've made my point. The system is sick, and it's due to assumptions like this essay made that the sickness is spreading and growing, not healing.
nickyO chapter 1 . 11/10/2011
Instead of challenging you on what you are saying (because I do disagree with much of it-like the gay issue), I think instead I'm going to ask you to think in a different direction. Instead of feeding into the current state of politics that chooses to lay blame (both left and right try to control popular thought), I'd challenge you to start thinking of solutions.

People are hurting. The problems are many. It's time to roll up our sleeves and get to work instead of saying my way or the highway. Start with the easy solutions, the no brainers that most people can agree on, and then tackle the bigger ones.
East-0f-Eden chapter 1 . 11/7/2011
And that is what's so ironic about it. He should be careful. They may say they're the 99% but they should get real. And he should be smart enough to realize that they aren't 99%.
SirScott chapter 1 . 11/3/2011
Wasn't there an expression during the Victorian era that a spade is a spade? What is offensive to the elite is always censored. It's kinda ironic that Obama has became the man and the hippies of the past took baths, got a hair cut, and became the establishment. Good job.

SirScott