dust1n
Zindīq
It's interesting that these folks have associated their movement with the flag of a government which ultimately failed miserably.
I didn't see anyone wave any country's flag.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It's interesting that these folks have associated their movement with the flag of a government which ultimately failed miserably.
I saw the hammer & sickle near the end, but not being waved.I didn't see anyone wave any country's flag.
I saw the hammer & sickle near the end, but not being waved.
Dang! I don't think we have a flag at all.....need to look into that.
What a party pooper!☭ is not synonymous with Russia. It was used before the Soviet Union to signify solidarity between peasants and farmers. After a quick Google search, that appears to be the flag of the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization. The symbol is used on many countries' flags, and thousands of organizations' flags. What is being flown a symbol for Communism, not a symbol for Russia.
What a party pooper!
You're over-analyzing tomato's joke.
Perfect! That's the great advantage of discussion over debating/arguing.Sorry, I just didn't see a country's flag.
Perfect! That's the great advantage of discussion over debating/arguing.
We each see the same thing, yet each see something different, & both of us are right.
Actually, only Dustin is right. It wasn't a Soviet flag.Perfect! That's the great advantage of discussion over debating/arguing.
We each see the same thing, yet each see something different, & both of us are right.
Once again, perfect!Mmm, I don't know if I can say both of us are right. That is not a Soviet flag. :foot:
It's much more interesting to see all the possibilities.Actually, only Dustin is right. It wasn't a Soviet flag.
Both political parties today are dominated by people who are in the pockets of the uber-rich, the banks, and the corporations. That's to say, so many of today's political leaders lack any left or right, liberal or conservative political convictions and are instead mere puppets.
There is still a real left wing in the House of Representatives, and he is married to Elizabeth Kucinich.
There is still a real left wing in the House of Representatives, and he is married to Elizabeth Kucinich.
Both political parties today are dominated by people who are in the pockets of the uber-rich, the banks, and the corporations. That's to say, so many of today's political leaders lack any left or right, liberal or conservative political convictions and are instead mere puppets.
Apparently not. Look at the results.Are these not the people who could get the economy going again and create jobs?
Both political parties today are dominated by people who are in the pockets of the uber-rich, the banks, and the corporations. That's to say, so many of today's political leaders lack any left or right, liberal or conservative political convictions and are instead mere puppets.
Are these not the people who could get the economy going again and create jobs?
I think this question is self-defeating. The absence of a true "left" means either:
1. There is no right, either. Left and right are terms of differentiation. If Right is opposite nothing, there's no point in using "right" to describe anyone.
2. Barack Obama is the same as the "right wing" people. Is that true?
Also, those on the left frequently refer to the "right" in political discussions. If they are not, in fact, left, then what are they talking about?