Calling It a New Name Won't Make Socialism Work

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Only if we're talking about real liberalism.

The root of Liberal is from freedom.

Then there's the fact that freedom would be Liberalism literally, selling drugs to 5 year olds, while those 5 year olds look at Porn, and those 5 year olds listen to Gangster rap music.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

Irrelevant that they aren't pushing 100%

1% is too much

 

[Brain357]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

Irrelevant that they aren't pushing 100%

1% is too much

Repubs may be pushing more..

 

[Mac1958]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution. Okay, sure, why not.

Irrelevant that they aren't pushing 100%
1% is too much

0% would be pure, unbridled anarchy, with zero safety net of any kind for anyone ever.

Is that really what you want?
.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

Irrelevant that they aren't pushing 100%

1% is too much

Sensible Right-Wingers, which Republicans are not, are aware that businesses should be regulated for socially Conservative values.

That's actually a form of Socialism.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Only if we're talking about real liberalism.

The root of Liberal is from freedom.

Then there's the fact that freedom would be Liberalism literally, selling drugs to 5 year olds, while those 5 year olds look at Porn, and those 5 year olds listen to Gangster rap music.

Liberty should never be written or spoken absent the word responsibility simply because of its primary foundation for moral code. Liberty-Responsibility. Liberty and responsibility cannot be accepted or rejected piece meal. They have to be accepted or rejected as an Indivisible whole, else there will be none at all.

That's a deep discussion. Too deep for this thread, for sure. Perhaps too deep for this forum.

I left libertarianism because the libertines became the primary spokespersons for it. Libertine, however, is not libertarian.

 

[Slade3200]

You’re forced into a collective with socialism whether you want to or not… Fuck the collective

Sure that was an answer to something, just not what I asked. Name a freedom you have that I don't? I for sure can give a freedom I have that you don't. I can send my kid to any school I choose, we don't have any school districts. Your turn.

There is no real freedom in the world today, obviously.

So if you say that there is no freedom in the world, what's wrong with Socialism? It seems that was your argument for not linking it?

Socialism is the very opposite of freedom, there is no individuality in Socialism

The freedom to have Porn, an Abortion, listen to Gangster Rap music, to wear Che-Guevara T-Shirts.

The freedom to be Muslim Gay, Black, Jewish, an Illegal immigrant, etc. etc.

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Freedom is freedom. The government is responsible for public safety and opportunity. Morality is up to each family to teach as they see fit... not for the government to regulate

 

[Slade3200]

But it’s never been implemented properly before – this time around. I’m sure top people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will succeed where Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Maduro, etc. have failed.


SORRY, DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS — YOU’RE STILL PUSHING POISON.

I happen to know a little something about the transfer of private industry to government control. My grandmother’s father had his bakery seized in the Soviet city of Gomel. He was sent to a gulag, where he then died.

Oh, that’s crazy, Democratic Socialists would respond. No one is planning to seize bakeries. And no one will be sent to prison for owning a business.

No? What if those who own companies in industries that “necessitate some form of state ownership” don’t want to give them up willingly? What happens when the state runs out of money from the industries seized and needs more?

It’s baffling how we can still be considering centralized control of industries when that has never worked anywhere. And how socialism lovers so easily dismiss the underlying foundation in countries that have veered toward some form of that system: capitalism. Countries such as Norway, for example, are helped by a large abundance of natural resources and an essentially capitalist system supporting the welfare state.

On the other hand, nations where socialism continues to wreak havoc and spur poverty, disease and crime, like Venezuela, don’t have much support from capitalism. Fact is, “socialism” only works when it’s paid for by capitalism.

* * * * * * * *

In the fall of 1959, Nikita Khrushchev gave a series of speeches here. In one, he said, “We are catching up with you in economic progress, and the time is not far distant when we will move into the lead.” In Russia, that prompted folks to joke: “When we finally catch up to America, can I get off?”

Do you understand the difference between democratic socialism and socialism or do you think they are the same thing?

They are the same thing.

And your ignorance is revealed! Thank you for making my point for me. Do some homework and come back when you are ready to play

If they aren't the same thing then democratic socialism is literally an oxymoron.

You realize this, right?

how exactly do you figure it is an oxymoron?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Sure that was an answer to something, just not what I asked. Name a freedom you have that I don't? I for sure can give a freedom I have that you don't. I can send my kid to any school I choose, we don't have any school districts. Your turn.

There is no real freedom in the world today, obviously.

So if you say that there is no freedom in the world, what's wrong with Socialism? It seems that was your argument for not linking it?

Socialism is the very opposite of freedom, there is no individuality in Socialism

The freedom to have Porn, an Abortion, listen to Gangster Rap music, to wear Che-Guevara T-Shirts.

The freedom to be Muslim Gay, Black, Jewish, an Illegal immigrant, etc. etc.

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Freedom is freedom. The government is responsible for public safety and opportunity. Morality is up to each family to teach as they see fit... not for the government to regulate

Why do you think morality has gone down so far in the West?

Morality does have a big impact on society, so why shouldn't it be regulated?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Only if we're talking about real liberalism.

The root of Liberal is from freedom.

Then there's the fact that freedom would be Liberalism literally, selling drugs to 5 year olds, while those 5 year olds look at Porn, and those 5 year olds listen to Gangster rap music.

Liberty should never be written or spoken absent the word responsibility simply because of its primary foundation for moral code. Liberty-Responsibility. Liberty and responsibility cannot be accepted or rejected piece meal. They have to be accepted or rejected as an Indivisible whole, else there will be none at all.

That's a deep discussion. Too deep for this thread, for sure. Perhaps too deep for this forum.

I left libertarianism because the libertines became the primary spokespersons for it. Libertine, however, is not libertarian.

So, okay?
People aren't responsible enough for Liberty?

 

[Toro]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

Irrelevant that they aren't pushing 100%

1% is too much

Which is why you hate SS, tariffs, etc.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The lack of responsibility of many people in society, proves Fascist theory correct.

Not only would the society benefit from Authoritarianism guiding the society in the right direction.

However, since many people can't properly take-care of themselves, they'd be taken care of.

Government is simply necessarily for civilization, there's a reason it was invented.

 

[Toro]

Morality does have a big impact on society, so why shouldn't it be regulated?

Thank you, Mr. Fascist/Socialist.

 

[Toro]

The lack of responsibility of many people in society, proves Fascist theory correct.

Not only would the society benefit from Authoritarianism guiding the society in the right direction.

However, since many people can't properly take-care of themselves, they'd be taken care of.

Government is simply necessarily for civilization, there's a reason it was invented.

Wow. You really are a socialist.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The lack of responsibility of many people in society, proves Fascist theory correct.

Not only would the society benefit from Authoritarianism guiding the society in the right direction.

However, since many people can't properly take-care of themselves, they'd be taken care of.

Government is simply necessarily for civilization, there's a reason it was invented.

Wow. You really are a socialist.

Right-Wing Socialist.
(Fascist)

Americans are a bunch of Liberal Individualists.

 

[Slade3200]

There is no real freedom in the world today, obviously.

So if you say that there is no freedom in the world, what's wrong with Socialism? It seems that was your argument for not linking it?

Socialism is the very opposite of freedom, there is no individuality in Socialism

The freedom to have Porn, an Abortion, listen to Gangster Rap music, to wear Che-Guevara T-Shirts.

The freedom to be Muslim Gay, Black, Jewish, an Illegal immigrant, etc. etc.

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Freedom is freedom. The government is responsible for public safety and opportunity. Morality is up to each family to teach as they see fit... not for the government to regulate

Why do you think morality has gone down so far in the West?

Morality does have a big impact on society, so why shouldn't it be regulated?

It can be regulated and it currently is, there are all kinds of regulations around the movies, music, and goods that we produce, market and sell. I’m not calling for zero regulation.

Morality has gone down because our society has become oversaturated on many levels and maintaining focus and discipline on core values has slipped away to acting in impulse. But that is a much larger discussion...

 

[ptbw forever]

But it’s never been implemented properly before – this time around. I’m sure top people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will succeed where Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Maduro, etc. have failed.


SORRY, DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS — YOU’RE STILL PUSHING POISON.

I happen to know a little something about the transfer of private industry to government control. My grandmother’s father had his bakery seized in the Soviet city of Gomel. He was sent to a gulag, where he then died.

Oh, that’s crazy, Democratic Socialists would respond. No one is planning to seize bakeries. And no one will be sent to prison for owning a business.

No? What if those who own companies in industries that “necessitate some form of state ownership” don’t want to give them up willingly? What happens when the state runs out of money from the industries seized and needs more?

It’s baffling how we can still be considering centralized control of industries when that has never worked anywhere. And how socialism lovers so easily dismiss the underlying foundation in countries that have veered toward some form of that system: capitalism. Countries such as Norway, for example, are helped by a large abundance of natural resources and an essentially capitalist system supporting the welfare state.

On the other hand, nations where socialism continues to wreak havoc and spur poverty, disease and crime, like Venezuela, don’t have much support from capitalism. Fact is, “socialism” only works when it’s paid for by capitalism.

* * * * * * * *

In the fall of 1959, Nikita Khrushchev gave a series of speeches here. In one, he said, “We are catching up with you in economic progress, and the time is not far distant when we will move into the lead.” In Russia, that prompted folks to joke: “When we finally catch up to America, can I get off?”

Do you understand the difference between democratic socialism and socialism or do you think they are the same thing?

They are the same thing.

And your ignorance is revealed! Thank you for making my point for me. Do some homework and come back when you are ready to play

If they aren't the same thing then democratic socialism is literally an oxymoron.

You realize this, right?

how exactly do you figure it is an oxymoron?

Because if socialism can’t be democratic then democratic socialism is impossible.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So if you say that there is no freedom in the world, what's wrong with Socialism? It seems that was your argument for not linking it?

Socialism is the very opposite of freedom, there is no individuality in Socialism

The freedom to have Porn, an Abortion, listen to Gangster Rap music, to wear Che-Guevara T-Shirts.

The freedom to be Muslim Gay, Black, Jewish, an Illegal immigrant, etc. etc.

Yes, I understand freedom is akin to Liberal values.

Freedom is freedom. The government is responsible for public safety and opportunity. Morality is up to each family to teach as they see fit... not for the government to regulate

Why do you think morality has gone down so far in the West?

Morality does have a big impact on society, so why shouldn't it be regulated?

It can be regulated and it currently is, there are all kinds of regulations around the movies, music, and goods that we produce, market and sell. I’m not calling for zero regulation.

Morality has gone down because our society has become oversaturated on many levels and maintaining focus and discipline on core values has slipped away to acting in impulse. But that is a much larger discussion...

Not enough for sure. Porn, and Rap Music should be basically censored out completely.

There's way too much trash out there in general.

A bunch of Capitalist smut peddlers trying to profit off of anti-Human values.

 

[Natural Citizen]

So, okay?
People aren't responsible enough for Liberty?

The responsibility is in defending it. The question becomes to whom are we responsible in defending it. Therein lies the primary foundation for moral code in which our Republic was founded. The giver of our Individual rights and freedom from government-over-man is to whom our responsibility to defend them lay.

All Men are created...endowed by their Creator. Right?

I'll say this and I'll stop here. Because it's a topic that would require its own thread/discussion and to be had by competent, educated, people who understand the nature of our compound Republic as well as the concept of Individual liberty as it relates to it. The greatest, and probably most generally unrecognized, threat to our liberty today results from the gradual erosion of virtue. This decay has resulted from negligence and apathy on the part of many and from calculated attacks on the part of a few. When the policies and practices of the nation favor rights in exclusion of responsibility, and sanction vice at the expense of virtue, whixch is precisely what we have happening, calamity is imminent.

I'm reminded of a great quote since we're talking about it. By James Madison. What he's said, and correctly so, was "I believe that there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."

And on that note, I'm leaving the thread. If anyone wants to talk about it in dept, then, start a new thread specific to it.

 

[Slade3200]

Do you understand the difference between democratic socialism and socialism or do you think they are the same thing?

They are the same thing.

And your ignorance is revealed! Thank you for making my point for me. Do some homework and come back when you are ready to play

If they aren't the same thing then democratic socialism is literally an oxymoron.

You realize this, right?

how exactly do you figure it is an oxymoron?

Because if socialism can’t be democratic then democratic socialism is impossible.

You can have socialist programs in a democracy, wouldn’t you agree? I mean that’s what we have here in the US. And we certainly aren’t a socialist country. It’s not an all or nothing thing. So what are you talking about?