Another one who doesn't know what communism is. The army is owned by the (elected) government, by your definition everyone who is in the army is communist.
Another one who hasn't served in the U.S. military. It operates almost identically to communist theory. You give up most of the rights you are protecting when you volunteer to serve and live in a system that is almost identical to the one which we are supposed to be fighting against:
Everything is provided to you: clothes, food, shelter, health care.
In return, you are required to "do your part" including sacrificing your life if need be (in all reality you fit the definition of an indentured servant: one step above slave because after you reach a certain time limit you are free again).
Everyone is "equal"... except just like Communism with a capital "C", there is a rank structure, so some are more equal than others.
But just because people are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to serve under this system does not make the individuals serving any more communist than the German people were Nazis. Likewise, quite a few love the system and abuse it to the fullest as so many Germans did under Nazi rule. Either way, I agree 100% with anyone who assesses that the U.S. military's organization fits the definition of communism.
In high school, there was a mandatory course called "Problems of American Democracy". It was basically a leftover from the 1950s propaganda which taught the evils of Communism. It provided very clear definitions of capitalism, communism, and "Communism". It made it all too clear that in an ideal world, unselfish people helping each other get through life as best as possible makes communism the clear choice compared to the cruel unforgiving history of capitalism. But, in the real world where people compete for limited resources, capitalism spanks Communism's bellybutton every time. Communism ensures that almost everyone gets equally bad food, shelter, and health care. Whereas the majority of the people in the U.S. live in conditions far superior to all but the most politically affluent under Soviet style Communism. Of course, a portion of the U.S. population lives in poverty conditions worse than many "third world" countries. Which system had to build walls to keep people in? Which system has to use barbed wire fences, border patrols, and the Coast Guard to keep people out? Propaganda aside, I served for 8 years under a system I hated to protect the system I love. Now, I want to enjoy the system I protected, not help convert it into the one I hated.
I don't vote for what I like or don't like, (i.e. personal opinion, especially over the short term), I vote for what I think will be best (based on logic, especially over the long run, as in long after I am dead). I would rather "waste" billions of dollars developing the ability to populate other planets than feed and clothe a bunch of people that can't figure out having kids is a bad idea when you can't even afford to take care of yourself. Both rich and poor will all die when this overcrowded planet exhausts its resources. But, in all probability, no one living today will ever benefit directly from such expenditures. Instead, lets see if we can keep everyone alive for 150 years or more even if they can't walk, talk, or eat or enjoy any aspect of life.
So go ahead, lets create one more goverment program which will consume more of an already overburdened budget to "help" people by keeping them healthy for free. Bad health is no accident. It comes from a combination of bad genetics and/or bad environment, both of which come from bad decisions made by the parents of the unhealthy individual.
Both nature and capitalism are cruel for a reason: rewarding good decisions and punishing bad decisions leads to improvement.
Beauracracy, liberals, and communism reward bad decisions and punish good decisions which leads to everybody suffering in the end.
I don't see the these two statements as opinions. I make them based on observations both from my own life and history in general. Of course two people can look at the same "facts" and draw very different conclusions. The place to resolve our differences in this country is at the voting booth. So far, despite 8 years of being ravaged by the liberal Clinton era with goals of a national health care system and banning guns completely, our government has done neither. Either the government is failing to respond to the will of the people, or the will of the people agrees with me. I'll keep my gun and pay for my own medical care
"It is better to live on your feet than die on your knees!"
