I believe it is implied by your initial two posts, and the third party you quoted. Even so, do you believe Democrats are Socialist?
Rights have been removed for the collective benefit...since the beginning of The Union. Each law/regulation removes a right or more. Every right is deemed granted, unless specifically removed by law, regulation, code, restriction, etc. We can't be a nation of laws, and, at the same time, be totally free. Laws are the opposite of freedom. Generally, freedom is granted and assumed by default. Laws restrict. We are a free nation of laws. Laws are present, in large part, due to the ignorant, uncivilized, incompetent, etc. Idiots won't stop at a four way intersection, so we have to restrict a freedom, in the name of safety; for the collective benefit. Idiots will yell fire in a theater, so we have to restrict free speech; for the collective benefit. It is a fallacy to assume that once you restrict a right, you'll eventually lose all, or most other rights. I agree wrt 'undermined' and 'arbitrary.'
I'd rather you reply to what I actually write . I don't believe them to be fully socialist but they're definitely anti meritocratic - western civilization model using marxist tactics to achieve their ends .
I understand that; but the reality is, That's how communication works. Reader(s) can believe that you implied something. You can admit or deny it. Reader(s) can accept any denials as being truthful, or not. I stand by my assessment. Do you believe that the Republicans are also anti meritocratic? Do you believe that Trump only appointed, and hired according to merit? Please detail these tactics, so we can discuss them; and see if the Republicans also use them.
I prefer to engage objectively with facts as to avoid errors and other people's over inflated egos . I think Trump v Clinton was horrible , they both were a terrible choice for both voters and for American democracy . The tactics are the weaponization of African Americans , class wars etc Do you agree with my view of the democrats ?
To engage objectively, and with facts, is to be specific. "Weaponization of African Americans" calls for an opinion as to what one considers weaponization. It's a conclusion, not facts. "Class wars." Again, overly broad 2) Provide an example(s) of where the dems have, in your opinion, weaponized Blacks, and where the reps have not done the same, since you are accusing the dems, and not the reps wrt Marxist tactics. 3) Provide an example(s) of where the dems have, in your opinion, promoted class wars, and where the reps have not done the same, since you are accusing the dems, and not the reps wrt Marxist tactics. Debating in the abstract gets nowhere in this type of forum, as you should know. Abstract concepts like 'weaponization' and 'class wars' have to be first reduced to a concrete 'something,' before they can be meaningfully discussed. This renewed question asks you whether what you've already asserted wrt dems, also applies to reps: 1) Do you believe that the Republicans are also anti meritocratic, in the same sense of the word as you used it with the dems? Additionally, I'll make an assertion: 4) The reps are more corrupt than the dems (Ref. https://rantt.com/gop-admins-had-38-times-more-criminal-convictions-than-democrats-1961-2016 ). 4) Agree?