NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio Goes Full Communist, Chastises Private Property

[Dashinka 24,831]

Interesting.

 

 

ByELLIOTT HAMILTON
September 6, 2017

 

In his interview with New York Magazine, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio offered some insight into his views and his tenure as mayor of the largest city in the United States. The interview, which seemed like an attempt to mitigate the mounting concerns about de Blasio's corruption and his constant virtue-signaling, shed some light on one of his biggest pet peeves: private property.

When asked by Chris Smith about his fight to reduce income inequality and where it was hard to make progress, he said the following:

 

       What’s been hardest is the way our legal system is structured to favor private property. I think people all over this city, of every background,      would like to have the city government be able to determine which building goes where, how high it will be, who gets to live in it, what the rent will be. I think there’s a socialistic impulse, which I hear every day, in every kind of community, that they would like things to be planned in accordance to their needs. And I would, too. Unfortunately, what stands in the way of that is hundreds of years of history that have elevated property rights and wealth to the point that that’s the reality that calls the tune on a lot of development.

 

In other words, he slammed the concept of private property in order to pursue the Communistic dream of government planning "according to everyone's needs." This quote is attributable to Karl Marx himself, who popularized it in his 1875 essay "Critique of the Gotha Program." Marx's entire quote is as follows:

In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

http://www.dailywire.com/news/20699/nyc-mayor-bill-de-blasio-goes-full-communist-elliott-hamilton

 

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/09/bill-de-blasio-in-conversation.html

 

 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

    The title is misleading. Rather than DiBlasio goes "full communist", it should be articles' author goes "full hyperbole".

 

    

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

15 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

    The title is misleading. Rather than DiBlasio goes "full communist", it should be articles' author goes "full hyperbole".

 

    

Sad but true.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Jeebis, I need a bigger coat for all these snowstorms!

[Dashinka 24,831]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

    The title is misleading. Rather than DiBlasio goes "full communist", it should be articles' author goes "full hyperbole".

 

    

So an important leader espouses the end of private property ownership and central planning by the city and they are not promoting Communism?  Both of those items are central tenants of the Communistic version of government.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

So an important leader espouses the end of private property ownership and central planning by the city and they are not promoting Communism?  Both of those items are central tenants of the Communistic version of government.

 

  Every city I've been to in the UK has council houses and public flats. These are built and planned by the municipality and they also determine who the qualified tenants are. Is that "full on communism"?

 

  In the USA, the government can take your property via eminent domain. The new owner gets to decide what is built there and who can use it. Is that "full on communism"?

 

   Like me, you have probably heard stories or seen first hand how full on communism works. I have little tolerance for hyperbole here because the US has a history of seeing and reacting to ghosts when it comes to communism. The political spectrum may be bipolar, but it is not black and white. There's a lot of grey area until you get to full on communism. The story above doesn't get there.

[Dashinka 24,831]

3 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Every city I've been to in the UK has council houses and public flats. These are built and planned by the municipality and they also determine who the qualified tenants are. Is that "full on communism"?

 

  In the USA, the government can take your property via eminent domain. The new owner gets to decide what is built there and who can use it. Is that "full on communism"?

 

   Like me, you have probably heard stories or seen first hand how full on communism works. I have little tolerance for hyperbole here because the US has a history of seeing and reacting to ghosts when it comes to communism. The political spectrum may be bipolar, but it is not black and white. There's a lot of grey area until you get to full on communism. The story above doesn't get there.

DeBlasio wasn't talking about setting up some council flats, he was giving a full attack on private property rights.  Do I think it will ever happen in NYC, I doubt it as there are far too many rich liberals that would revolt and go to the other side, but it is sad to hear a major leader espouse this form of government.  We do know that Communism killed far more people than Nazism ever did.  This is not to say Nazism was better, rather to say that both of these forms of government are really, really bad.

 

Eminent Domain is not anywhere near comparable to Communism as when this occurs, the previous owner is supposed to be compensated at market rates when it occurs, Communism does not provide any compensation when it confiscates land and property.  Yes, I have a very close source that has grown up under Communism and has no desire to see it again.  I just got back from a city that was horribly layed out under central planning processes, and is still working hard to erase that period.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

12 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Every city I've been to in the UK has council houses and public flats. These are built and planned by the municipality and they also determine who the qualified tenants are. Is that "full on communism"?

 

  In the USA, the government can take your property via eminent domain. The new owner gets to decide what is built there and who can use it. Is that "full on communism"?

 

   Like me, you have probably heard stories or seen first hand how full on communism works. I have little tolerance for hyperbole here because the US has a history of seeing and reacting to ghosts when it comes to communism. The political spectrum may be bipolar, but it is not black and white. There's a lot of grey area until you get to full on communism. The story above doesn't get there.

Trump is a Communist then 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

19 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

DeBlasio wasn't talking about setting up some council flats, he was giving a full attack on private property rights.  Do I think it will ever happen in NYC, I doubt it as there are far too many rich liberals that would revolt and go to the other side, but it is sad to hear a major leader espouse this form of government.  We do know that Communism killed far more people than Nazism ever did.  This is not to say Nazism was better, rather to say that both of these forms of government are really, really bad.

 

Eminent Domain is not anywhere near comparable to Communism as when this occurs, the previous owner is supposed to be compensated at market rates when it occurs, Communism does not provide any compensation when it confiscates land and property.  Yes, I have a very close source that has grown up under Communism and has no desire to see it again.  I just got back from a city that was horribly layed out under central planning processes, and is still working hard to erase that period.

 

  Exactly. Eminent domain is not communism, Council houses are not communism, and city planning in NYC is not communism. You must agree then, that the article is hyperbole.

 

  In case you only read the Dailywire article, and not the NYT article, what DiBlasio says is if he had is way, the city government would determine how development would proceed on any plot, and strictly regulate rent and income levels of tenants on those developed plot's. No where in the article does it say DiBlasio wants to seize existing property. That is the hyperbole part.

[Dashinka 24,831]

11 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Exactly. Eminent domain is not communism, Council houses are not communism, and city planning in NYC is not communism. You must agree then, that the article is hyperbole.

 

  In case you only read the Dailywire article, and not the NYT article, what DiBlasio says is if he had is way, the city government would determine how development would proceed on any plot, and strictly regulate rent and income levels of tenants on those developed plot's. No where in the article does it say DiBlasio wants to seize existing property. That is the hyperbole part.

But you seem to be ignoring his blazen attack on private property rights.  Again, public ownership of all property is a central tenant of Communism.

 

I love the fact that when Trump tweets something out the Left gets their panties in a bunch, but when another important leader espouses Communism it is hyperbole.  By the way, the city already controls development through zoning laws, so his wish is already true.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

11 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

But you seem to be ignoring his blazen attack on private property rights.  Again, public ownership of all property is a central tenant of Communism.

 

I love the fact that when Trump tweets something out the Left gets their panties in a bunch, but when another important leader espouses Communism it is hyperbole.  By the way, the city already controls development through zoning laws, so his wish is already true.

 

   He doesn't say people can't own private property. He said the city would determine how development would proceed, and there would be stringent requirements around income level and rent. He doesn't clarify it any more than that. Anything else is an assumption, which is how the author got to his misguided assertion.

 

    ETA: regarding the segue into Trump, De Blasio is the mayor of NYC. I have no affiliation with him, nor does he represent me. There is no comparison or correlation there with Trump unless you live in NYC.

 

   

Edited September 8, 2017 by Steeleballz

[Dashinka 24,831]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   He doesn't say people can't own private property. He said the city would determine how development would proceed, and there would be stringent requirements around income level and rent. He doesn't clarify it any more than that. Anything else is an assumption, which is how the author got to his misguided assertion.

 

    ETA: regarding the segue into Trump, De Blasio is the mayor of NYC. I have no affiliation with him, nor does he represent me. There is no comparison or correlation there with Trump unless you live in NYC.

 

   

No he just opines how the private property rights are tying the cities hands.  How is that supposed to be interpreted?  While I agree, this is just blather of a leader that is communist leaning, and thank God there are checks and balances in place for the millions of people that are impacted by his leadership.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

20 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

No he just opines how the private property rights are tying the cities hands.  How is that supposed to be interpreted?  While I agree, this is just blather of a leader that is communist leaning, and thank God there are checks and balances in place for the millions of people that are impacted by his leadership.

I think you intended for the last sentence in your paragraph to be it's own paragraph about Trump. Amirite?

[Dashinka 24,831]

Just now, ready4ONE said:

I think you intended for the last sentence in your paragraph to be it's own paragraph about Trump. Amirite?

I think that it could apply to any mayor, governor, president, or dog catcher.