Denaturalize And Deport Zohran Mamdani For Immigration Fraud

Valletta · Jul 17, 2025

Prior to taking this oath, Mamdani completed Form N-400. Because of what we know about his political ideology, he lied in answering question 5b within part nine of the form — a question that asks the applicant if they have ever advocated for communism, among other inquiries.

Denaturalize And Deport Zohran Mamdani For Immigration Fraud

Any serious nation with an interest in self-preservation would immediately denaturalize and deport Mamdani.

thefederalist.com

There is enough evidence to hold a hearing on the matter.

Gene2memE · Jul 17, 2025

That article is exceedingly dumb. This paragraph is just telling on yourself:

"The Democratic Socialists of America is a de facto communist organization, which means that Mamdani joined a communist enterprise prior to becoming a U.S. citizen. No meaningful difference distinguishes socialism and communism — only trivial, superficial divergences that amount to distinctions without differences."

If you can't recognise that there are varieties of socialism that are vastly different from each other, and that those are vastly different to the form of Communism advocated by Marx, Engels and Lenin, then you really shouldn't be writing an article about political economics.

For those who don't want to waste their time, the TL

R of the article is: "Hur, dur. Socialism is Communism. Therefore, deport populist politician and brown person".

Hans Blaster · Jul 17, 2025

Gene2memE said:
That article is exceedingly dumb.

It was in "the federalist", so that goes without saying most times.

Gene2memE said:
This paragraph is just telling on yourself:

"The Democratic Socialists of America is a de facto communist organization, which means that Mamdani joined a communist enterprise prior to becoming a U.S. citizen. No meaningful difference distinguishes socialism and communism — only trivial, superficial divergences that amount to distinctions without differences."

If you can't recognise that there are varieties of socialism that are vastly different from each other, and that those are vastly different to the form of Communism advocated by Marx, Engels and Lenin, then you really shouldn't be writing an article about political economics.

For those who don't want to waste their time, the TLR of the article is: "Hur, dur. Socialism is Communism. Therefore, deport populist politician and brown person".

The "are you a communist" question on these kinds of forms is so outdated. One of many things that needs to be cleaned up in government.

Valletta · Jul 17, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
It was in "the federalist", so that goes without saying most times.

The "are you a communist" question on these kinds of forms is so outdated. One of many things that needs to be cleaned up in government.

It's important to know what a non-citizen applies to be here is or is affiliated with the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party or terrorist organization.

Desk trauma · Jul 17, 2025

My does he have people hot and bothered.

Larniavc · Jul 17, 2025

Valletta said:
There is enough evidence to hold a hearing on the matter.

The criteria for holding hearings seem remarkably partisan.

BCP1928 · Jul 17, 2025

Valletta said:
Prior to taking this oath, Mamdani completed Form N-400. Because of what we know about his political ideology, he lied in answering question 5b within part nine of the form — a question that asks the applicant if they have ever advocated for communism, among other inquiries.

Denaturalize And Deport Zohran Mamdani For Immigration Fraud

Any serious nation with an interest in self-preservation would immediately denaturalize and deport Mamdani.

thefederalist.com

There is enough evidence to hold a hearing on the matter.

Evidence that the Democratic Socialists of America is a de facto communist organization? Good luck with that.

Hans Blaster · Jul 17, 2025

Valletta said:
It's important to know what a non-citizen applies to be here is or is affiliated with the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party or terrorist organization.

I mean, come on man. This is just some relic of the Red Scares. Are we still worried the Soviets will take over?

ThatRobGuy · Jul 17, 2025

Gene2memE said:
"No meaningful difference distinguishes socialism and communism — only trivial, superficial divergences that amount to distinctions without differences"

While I would agree that the question itself is outdated and sounds like a holdover from the McCarthy era...

This bit you quoted from the article, it's not inaccurate.

While, on paper, there are some small differences between the two, in practical "real world" application, they've been relatively indistinguishable from each other.

They both:
- Seek to have an expansive public sector
- Trend towards single-party rule
- Massive restrictions of (or outright abolishment of) private property
- Use top-down measures for redistribution

While the underlying philosophies are a tad different:
Marx's theory of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (communism)
vs.
Henry Saint Simone's "From each according to ability, to each according to his contribution (socialism)
(Marx's theory suggests that Socialism is a stepping stone from capitalism to communism)

And the circumstances by which they've been introduced have some deviation
Communism is something that's done to people (typically against their will)
Socialism is something people often do to themselves (vote your way in, shoot your way out)

In real world practical terms, the end result and lived experience isn't much different for people who are stuck in either system.

The lived experience of someone living in Cuba (who had single-party communist party rule, and saw socialism as the "transitional system on the way to communism" much like the USSR did) didn't differ vastly from someone living in Venezuela, who merely sought to achieve and maintain socialism.

BCP1928 · Jul 17, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
They both:
- Seek to have an expansive public sector
- Trend towards single-party rule
- Massive restrictions of (or outright abolishment of) private property
- Use top-down measures for redistribution

The next thing you need to do is show that the policies of authoritarian socialism which you list are the policies of the DSA. Be careful with your arguments, however, because the policies you list are the same as the policies of authoritarian capitalism--or "neoliberalism" as it is called nowadays, and the differences between authoritarian socialism and democratic socialism are similar to the differences between neoliberalism and free market capitalism.

Hans Blaster · Jul 17, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
While, on paper, there are some small differences between the two, in practical "real world" application, they've been relatively indistinguishable from each other.

They both:
- Seek to have an expansive public sector
- Trend towards single-party rule
- Massive restrictions of (or outright abolishment of) private property
- Use top-down measures for redistribution

Where are these socialist, but non-Communist, countries where these things have happened, particularly the "one party rule" and "banning of private property"? Do tell.

ThatRobGuy · Jul 17, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
Where are these socialist, but non-Communist, countries where these things have happened, particularly the "one party rule" and "banning of private property"? Do tell.

Further down in that post... Venezuela would be an example.

While Venezuela didn't seek to use socialism as a stepping stone to communism (like Cuba did)...but rather, saw socialism itself as the goal.

Chavez governed under what was, in essence, one-party rule. (I believe what it's called is hegemonic party dominance -- where other parties are technically allowed to exist as a token and formality, but all levers of power are legally tilted in favor of the ruling party)

Venezuela’s Chavez Era

This timeline offers a visual account of Hugo Chavez's rise to power and the impact of his presidency.

www.cfr.org

And it's well recorded that he did seize private property

https://www.npr.org/2009/07/15/106620230/in-venezuela-land-redistribution-program-backfires

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez Versus the Human Right of Private Property - Americas Quarterly

You wouldn’t know it the way the media and most human rights groups have covered Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez’s recent seizure of land on May 11, but the right to private property is protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Most have treated President Chávez’s most...

www.americasquarterly.org

He went on record multiple times as saying (both articles reference quotes of that nature):
“Land isn’t private; it’s the property of the nation… Land is, by nature, the property of everyone”

And he facilitated that merely by having laws changed that said he could simply take it, or acquire it through forced sales at well-below market values.

Hans Blaster · Jul 17, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
Further down in that post... Venezuela would be an example.

While Venezuela didn't seek to use socialism as a stepping stone to communism (like Cuba did)...but rather, saw socialism itself as the goal.

Chavez governed under what was, in essence, one-party rule. (I believe what it's called is hegemonic party dominance -- where other parties are technically allowed to exist as a token and formality, but all levers of power are legally tilted in favor of the ruling party)

Venezuela’s Chavez Era

This timeline offers a visual account of Hugo Chavez's rise to power and the impact of his presidency.

www.cfr.org

And it's well recorded that he did seize private property

https://www.npr.org/2009/07/15/106620230/in-venezuela-land-redistribution-program-backfires

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez Versus the Human Right of Private Property - Americas Quarterly

You wouldn’t know it the way the media and most human rights groups have covered Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez’s recent seizure of land on May 11, but the right to private property is protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Most have treated President Chávez’s most...

www.americasquarterly.org

He went on record multiple times as saying (both articles reference quotes of that nature):
“Land isn’t private; it’s the property of the nation… Land is, by nature, the property of everyone”

And he facilitated that merely by having laws changed that said he could simply take it, or acquire it through forced sales at well-below market values.

So, let's see how this sorts out...

You've got a grand total of one country that is on this "socialism is the same as communism" path with the authoritarianism, one party state, etc., BUT it explicitly disavows the notion that it is communist. Thus, if Mamdani had been the son of a high-ranking Chavez official and in the "Chavez Youth" organization, he could still honestly say on his form that he wasn't a Communist. This was very enlightening, and as we suspected, the federalist was full of it.

ThatRobGuy · Jul 17, 2025

BCP1928 said:
The next thing you need to do is show that the policies of authoritarian socialism which you list are the policies of the DSA. Be careful with your arguments, however, because the policies you list are the same as the policies of authoritarian capitalism--or "neoliberalism" as it is called nowadays, and the differences between authoritarian socialism and democratic socialism are similar to the differences between neoliberalism and free market capitalism.

First off, sounds like that DSA should've picked a different name if they didn't want to be immediately associated with the previous stigmas of the "S-word"

It's like if someone created a new party called the AEA ("Atheistic Evangelicals of America")

But to your question about overlapping policies

- Both favor public/non-profit control of essential sectors
- Both call for social housing as a right
- Both call for democratic control of workplaces in "non-essential" sectors

Hans Blaster · Jul 17, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
First off, sounds like that DSA should've picked a different name if they didn't want to be immediately associated with the previous stigmas of the "S-word"

Maybe they want to destigmatize it. Maybe they think the "Socialist" part is the most important (or at least co-equal with "Democratic".

ThatRobGuy said:
It's like if someone created a new party called the AEA ("Atheistic Evangelicals of America")

Atheists can evangelize. I think you wanted something more like "Atheist Christians of America", but that wouldn't be a political party, but a cognitive dissonance club.

ThatRobGuy said:
But to your question about overlapping policies

- Both favor public/non-profit control of essential sectors
- Both call for social housing as a right
- Both call for democratic control of workplaces in "non-essential" sectors

Oh noes.

ThatRobGuy · Jul 17, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
So, let's see how this sorts out...

You've got a grand total of one country that is on this "socialism is the same as communism" path with the authoritarianism, one party state, etc., BUT it explicitly disavows the notion that it is communist. Thus, if Mamdani had been the son of a high-ranking Chavez official and in the "Chavez Youth" organization, he could still honestly say on his form that he wasn't a Communist. This was very enlightening, and as we suspected, the federalist was full of it.

You asked for an example, but there are others. Bolivia checks a lot of the same boxes as Venezuela does

If you rewind to the cold war era, Yugoslavia and Albania both broke some ties with the USSR and opted for the "self-managed socialist" model, but the lived experience of people in those nations wasn't really any better than someone living in Romania or East Germany.

ThatRobGuy · Jul 17, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
Oh noes.

It is when you consider history, and consider that the approach of "let the government control every major sector" has often ended with shortages and rationing.

And if the DSA is looking to distance themselves from the administrations like that of Hugo Chavez, and draw a clear distinction between "Socialism" and "Democratic Socialism", it'd probably be wise for them to cut back on this kind of stuff

Hugo Chávez: A World-Historical Leader

The ten-year anniversary of the passing of President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela reminds us what an important leader the world lost on March 5th, 2013.

international.dsausa.org

...just as friendly suggestion to them.

Hans Blaster · Jul 17, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
It is when you consider history, and consider that the approach of "let the government control every major sector" has often ended with shortages and rationing.

You can disagree with their points and argue against them all you want. It's a free country (for now).

ThatRobGuy said:
And if the DSA is looking to distance themselves from the administrations like that of Hugo Chavez, and draw a clear distinction between "Socialism" and "Democratic Socialism", it'd probably be wise for them to cut back on this kind of stuff

Hugo Chávez: A World-Historical Leader

The ten-year anniversary of the passing of President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela reminds us what an important leader the world lost on March 5th, 2013.

international.dsausa.org

...just as friendly suggestion to them.

I'm sure they'd enjoy that as much as we non-socialists do.

ThatRobGuy · Jul 17, 2025

Hans Blaster said:
I'm sure they'd enjoy that as much as we non-socialists do.

At the very least, if they do want to distance themselves from authoritarian socialism or communism, they should definitely avoid few of the buzzwords they're tossing around in that link I posted

This example of steadfastly pursuing an anti-capitalist, pro-socialist, and anti-imperialist program inspired movements and people in the rest of Latin America to elect similar leftist leaders throughout the region between 2003 and 2010, bringing forth the first so-called “pink tide” in Latin America. His efforts to redistribute Venezuela’s wealth, to re-democratize the country’s political system, and to build international solidarity within the Global South almost single-handedly put socialism back on the agenda for people the world over.

This revival of socialism and expansion of what socialism can mean is at the heart of why Chávez remains a world-historical leader and most-revered comrade to DSA

BCP1928 · Jul 17, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
First off, sounds like that DSA should've picked a different name if they didn't want to be immediately associated with the previous stigmas of the "S-word"

No, they just under-estimated the propaganda efforts of their opponents. What they really are is a labor party, but calling it a labor party could be made to sound just as scary, I'm sure.

ThatRobGuy said:
It's like if someone created a new party called the AEA ("Atheistic Evangelicals of America")

But to your question about overlapping policies

- Both favor public/non-profit control of essential sectors
- Both call for social housing as a right
- Both call for democratic control of workplaces in "non-essential" sectors

I'm not sure what you mean by "democratic control of the workplace" but right now they're calling for free market capitalism --the only party calling for anything that even resembles free market capitalism with any honesty.

Denaturalize And Deport Zohran Mamdani For Immigration Fraud

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Raised by bees

Well-Known Member

The pickles are up to something

"Encourage him to keep talking. He's hilarious."

Well-Known Member

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

Raised by bees

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Similar threads