Becomes Trump a dictator?

[Eli1]

Hitler actually got 34% of the vote just enough to make his party the top dog. Then started chasing or killing the others off. Second how was he responding to the humiliation of loosing 2 world wars when he started the second one? Making up history to fit your political arguments is just as bad as inventing gender science like the liberals do.

Seriously?
I learned history in 2 continents in 2 different classes and NONE of the things you mentioned were said in either East or the West.
I mean, do you even watch the American history channel which is essentially World War 1 and World War 2 channel with original black and white footage?

 

[Eli1]

If I am not wrong, the most american people today would not elect Him again. So 41% are sufficent with his work in the 100 days of reign.
I dont understand how a person in leadership and much power and responsibility treats other people? What is this cultural rhetoric?
The decisions he makes has also influence of the whole world. So I should be not interestet?
In your eyes I may sound ridiculus. But you cant tell me that I am wrong.
And I did not compared Trump with Hitler, please do not read in what I did not said.

Wolfie you are wrong here and i will try to explain but i don't think you have been able to understand it maybe due to the language barrier or perhaps you can't let go of certain ideas that they taught you.

* Polls in USA have always said that Trump is going to lose and Trump is just horrible. Contrary to evidence, they were all wrong.
This means that the credibility of polls is lower then it was because true journalism is dead.

* He treats people a lot better than the left treats people. The left treats people as victims, entitled and muzzled. Trump is the opposite of that. He tells it like it is and bases his ideas on competition since he grew up in the New York shark real-estate market.

* Cultural rhetoric is the day to day life of citizens in every nation. Things such as sports, news, politics, faith and a million of other things which make up the culture of a nation. Since you're not in USA, you are missing out on these things which influence people's ideas and politics.

* If your nation's interests are tied to USA then it would be wise on your end to not use USA as an endless cow you can milk without even saying Thank you, which is another cultural point of liberals here who come off as elitists with attitudes.

* You did compare Trump to Hitler and if you don't see that, then i can't make it more clear for you.

 

[ZNP]

Nah, you can't have a godless, classless, borderless society based on darwinism even in the Garden of Eden because there is a God, he made male and female and thus the rudiments of classes in the Garden, and then of course it's a little bit hindsight, but Eden had a border as clearly mankind was cast outside the border and God established a pretty tight border security arrangement.

The early church had a form of communism and they were not godless nor were they based on darwinism. Just because some forms of communism are does not mean we must infer all forms are.

 

[Jackson129]

Seriously?
I learned history in 2 continents in 2 different classes and NONE of the things you mentioned were said in either East or the West.
I mean, do you even watch the American history channel which is essentially World War 1 and World War 2 channel with original black and white footage?

Ok show me a link where Hitler got 6% of the vote. And show me how he was reacting to losing 2 world wars.

 

[ZNP]

Hitler actually got 34% of the vote just enough to make his party the top dog. Then started chasing or killing the others off. Second how was he responding to the humiliation of loosing 2 world wars when he started the second one? Making up history to fit your political arguments is just as bad as inventing gender science like the liberals do.

In 1932 he got 6%. It was enough for him to win a seat. In 1933 they had the Reichstag election in which his party got 33%. They had engineered a false flag attack on the Reichstag which they blamed on the communists, hence the swing from those who wanted a government that was stronger against communism. But even so, two thirds of Germany did not agree with him at that point. The height of his popularity was after they annexed Austria. However as long as he was winning in Poland and France his popularity held. It wasn't until the Russian front opened that his popularity fell.

However, if you are going to compare him to Trump you have to compare how he did in 1932 with how Trump did in his election. No comparison.

Also the German miracle made Hitler look like a great world leader, what the German people didn't know was the cost of that miracle would be the death of their sons and destruction of their country.

 

[Cameron143]

The early church had a form of communism and they were not godless nor were they based on darwinism. Just because some forms of communism are does not mean we must infer all forms are.

Not actually communism because communism doesn't allow for the ownership of private property. Neither was it socialism because it was not state sponsored. The decision to give or not give was left with the individual. It was a system based on individual giving, uncoerced by anything other than love.

 

[ZNP]

Not actually communism because communism doesn't allow for the ownership of private property. Neither was it socialism because it was not state sponsored. The decision to give or not give was left with the individual. It was a system based on individual giving, uncoerced by anything other than love.

Once again, you don't get to decide what the definition of communism is. "Having all things in common" is a viable definition.

Also, there is no country on earth where they do not allow ownership of private property.

 

[SonJudgment]

The early church had a form of communism and they were not godless nor were they based on darwinism. Just because some forms of communism are does not mean we must infer all forms are.

Then they weren't communists. The lie of darwinism is the criticial underpining of all socialistic ideology, in other words because they believe in the lie of darwinism they also believe a society will evolve via struggle (but in reality they only get themselves cursed). Though I get your point about utopian ideals.

 

[ZNP]

Then they weren't communists. The lie of darwinism is the criticial underpining of all socialistic ideology. Though I get your point about utopian ideals.

If you pick the definitions bandied about on this thread no one on earth is communist.

The early church had all things in common, that is a valid definition of communism.

 

[Jackson129]

I've never compared trump to Hitler. When all the left has is he's a dirty facisist and all the right has is he's a dirty commie. Its the exact same thing. Just appealing to the lowest common denominator. So while we are sitting down here pointing our fingers at each other they are laughing about how stupid we are not to see who's taking us behind the woodshed.

 

[SonJudgment]

If you pick the definitions bandied about on this thread no one on earth is communist.

The early church had all things in common, that is a valid definition of communism.

I would agree with that, there are no real communists because darwinism is a lie, all they can really do is try to make the lie real, but then reality snaps them back in the ass.

 

[Cameron143]

Once again, you don't get to decide what the definition of communism is. "Having all things in common" is a viable definition.

Also, there is no country on earth where they do not allow ownership of private property.

Another definition of communism, largely accepted, is an economic system in which all property is state owned. It's not my definition. And while there is indeed liberty taken by those who run the system, that doesn't change the definition.

 

[wolfwint]

Liberals call this Cognitive Dissonance.

They learn this after spending $200K on a top ivy league school.

I am not a liberal and if you laying things in what I not have said then it is your buisseness.

 

[wolfwint]

Hitler got 6% of the vote. Comparing Trump to Hitler by saying he had the same kind of support is not true.

Second, Hitler did "make Germany great again" at least it appeared that way, it was the "German miracle". Actually people in the west building up Germany's manufacturing and military to be a defense against Communism from Russia.

If you believe that the tariffs will destroy the US economy then you believe Trump is operating as the exact opposite of Hitler.

Hitler was responding to the humiliation to Germany losing the two world wars. That is not the situation that Trump is in, right now the US is the biggest superpower in the world. We are not paying reparations to the countries that beat us, instead our currency is the reserve currency, we can print as much money as we wish.

Comparing Hitler to Trump is not enlightening, it confuses the issue with what is really going on.

Hitler was a little horn that took power. Right now the three biggest horns on earth are the US, China, and NATO. Those three horns are removed and replaced with the little horn. Comparing Trump to Hitler is a misdirection play running cover for the real Antichrist.

This is not what I said.

 

[ZNP]

Another definition of communism, largely accepted, is an economic system in which all property is state owned. It's not my definition. And while there is indeed liberty taken by those who run the system, that doesn't change the definition.

Yes, but in my post which has received so much commentary I had the provision that it would work if there were no fall of man and no sin. So all the definitions you have are those that include the fall of man, sin, blasphemy, etc. Your definitions are not relevant to my post.

 

[ZNP]

This is not what I said.

I was not responding to you.

 

[Cameron143]

Yes, but in my post which has received so much commentary I had the provision that it would work if there were no fall of man and no sin. So all the definitions you have are those that include the fall of man, sin, blasphemy, etc. Your definitions are not relevant to my post.

Fair enough. A thousand pardons.

 

[DeanM]

Let it go. Yo

I think ZNP meant that the system that was in the Eden, would be more like "communism" for the lack of better word here in our place and time where we are incapable to describe God's glory fully in words.
The system would be "communist" because God provides everything to everyone, which is why it's impossible to establish a Kingdom of God here ourselves as sinful humans separated from God because we are not capable to erase national borders and feed 5000 people with a dozen loafs of bread and fish.
Only God can do that and provide unlimited resources.

You will never convince them. They would have loved to see 8 more years of evil under word salad harris.

 

[SonJudgment]

Another definition of communism, largely accepted, is an economic system in which all property is state owned. It's not my definition. And while there is indeed liberty taken by those who run the system, that doesn't change the definition.

That's partially it, but that's more like the means to an ends. All socialistic ideologies, which communism is part of, are underpinned by darwinism. Socialistic ideologies are based in materialistic philosophy and an idea called social darwinism. Every single socialistic leader from Lenin to Mao to Hitler always puts a high emphasis on struggle. This is not a coincidence nor a mistake, it's baked into it because the socialist makes the fundamental presumption that darwinism exists, therefore they attempt to apply it to society and think a utopia will evolve out of their struggles in a darwinistic manner.

This might help explain better than me:

 

[wolfwint]

I was not responding to you.

In the post 4374 you respondet my post.
So to whom else you respondet?