Why Does Atheism and Left-Wing Politics Usually Go Together?

[cratehorus]

In a communist society, those that refuse to work are still looked after by the society. They are rewarded with food, etc

So what YOU are saying is that the lazy should be left to starve to death as an example to the rest of us? am I right?

A person can quite happily do nothing and still get to eat

how evil

, since the distribution of food and supplies in communism is based on needs, not on who has earned it.

how do you define what is earned? how do you define what is needed? And shouldn't the government's sole and only pupose to be to satisify the most basic needs of society? 100 years ago the only form of transportation I needed was a plain beast of burden..... in modern society I need a car, I am born with the need for a car, so why shouldn't the same society, that has given these needs, provide with this resource? Is it because said society uses things like this, to seperate ween, and filter, the unwanted, or as you seem to want to call them, the "lazy" from society?

In capitalism, the distribution is based on how much work you put in. Work hard, and you get more. Be successful, and you get more. The only help that slackers get would be from charities (though I suspect not many charities would support known work-avoiders).

or how much work your father put in, or your grandfather, or great-grandfather, or however long your blood, has begun accumulating capital

What makes a person lazy? No idea. I'm not including people with mental health problems who are made lazy by their illness. I'm talking about people who make an active choice not to go and work.

why not? your libertarian (or what I'm trying to make you realize is at best a ultra-extremist anarcho-capitalist) idealogy would have ALL mental health victims left for dead, or as Hitler put it "euthanized"

Why am I not lazy? A few reasons:
- I don't like having to depend on other people (I'd rather help myself).
- I like working.
- I like enjoying things, which in this society requires money, and work gets me money.

Nothing to do with race, culture, or my upbringing (no race or culture survives if it is inherently lazy). I never said I was a better person from birth. A person may become lazy over time.

that's your main problem, you think it's scientifuckly possible for ANY RACE OR CULTURE TO BE INHERENTLY LAZY

if it wasn't for your country's "labour party" you'd be your king's personal slave............

Explain...

Who do you think is responsible for your freedom? your king?

Indeed, if the slave in question actively chose to be a slave, then Libertarianism would allow it. There is a massive difference between these kinds of slaves and the traditional image of slavery. Any slave under a Libertarian government would still hold all their rights, and would at any time be able to stop being a slave if they changed their mind. In reality, they are a slave in name only. The state would always support the right to own your own body, so even if you state that it is owned by another person, the state would support you if you wanted to own your own body again.

Unconscionable contract laws prevents just that, you sign a contract going into debt, you are then a "slave", and any judge will uphold said contract..........it's illegal thanks to the civil war, would you like another?.............???

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionar...e+contract

I never said I know more about communism than karl marx. Indeed, I thought the entire point of this conversation was for you to convince me of communism? Anyway, a "successful" communist nation would be one which adheres to the ideology of communism. It would be classless, moneyless, and stateless.

I would like to have a discussion about the difference between the terms "state", country, and nation, but more pertinent to the issue, is the fact no such nation has ever existed, therefore your original request "is there a successful communist nation" is impossible to answer

I'm talking about in general, a US citizen is allowed to buy a barrel of oil. The same cannot be said for North Koreans. Government control over an economy can be measured by how many restrictions a government places on its own citizens in terms of what they can buy. The trade decisions of other nations does not form part of the measurement.

nobody in north Korea can buy oil from america or OPEC, I know they get oil from China, but I have a feeling your not referencing that, and you just don't know what an embargo means.

so let's say I go your house with a gun and force you family to not eat food for 3 days.......... then I call the neighbor's and tell them "look at how horrible this man treats his family look there starving!" then you say "hey you held us hostage and forced us to starve at gun point", and all the neighbor's do is call you a liar.

Not sure I understand what your analogy is even meant to be about. Please explain.

North korea is at war, it is under embargo, I don't how I can be more clear about this?

Ok, first off I'm not watching ron paul conspiracy videos. I do my own research into global politics. Whether the US is still at war with North Korea is complete irrelevant to the fact that North Korea's economy is government controlled.

Controlled by the US....???? then yes!

Oh, you mean the mountain of evidence which you promised but were never able to actually present? Your evidence involved equating "Ron Paul" with "every Libertarian", and "Neo-confederates" with "White supremacists". Both are false equivocations; definitions are not so black and white.

neo-confederates are white supremacists.....newsflash

You have yet to present actual evidence of Ron Paul speaking at that Nazi rally which you promised repeatedly. All you did was present videos of him speaking about state's rights to secede (in itself, not a racist thing at all). On the other hand, I can present numerous videos of Ron Paul talking about the unfair discrimination against black people, and how as President he would help, as well as testimony from black and interracial couples whom he helped whilst he was a doctor.

I don't think we should wait for 1 person to kill 6 million jews all by himself, before we call him a nazi

So, why do I still refuse to believe? Because you haven't actually presented any evidence that validates your claim. Your claim is that Ron Paul and the Libertarian movement is a white supremacist movement. Evidence that validated that claim would show directly that this was the case. Showing that Ron Paul will stand for photos with racists, even assuming he knew how they were, is not evidence of that. Showing that Ron Paul will talk about state's rights to succede in front of neo-confederates, is not evidence of that either. Provide the evidence you promised and I'll believe you.

You shouldn't require this amount of evidence, unless you are harboring some kind of deep resentment to a group, you are not willing too admit, you hate

you can private message me with this info if you want