Explaining Socialism to a Republican

[g5000]

all white nationalists vote Conservative.

dear, what is a white nationalist and who are the white nationalists?

Is that a serious question?

 

[JoeNormal]

Another self proclaimed victor. You cons just can't lose!

Says he who knows he cannot answer my question.

I guess I'll have to reiterate since you weren't bright enough to get it the first time.

1) Freedom means different things to different people.
2) Cons are simplemindedly forcing their version of freedom for the upper class on to the rest of us.

And now a recap of your way of 'winning':

1) Misunderstand the opposing point of view.
2) Declare yourself the victor.

So declining to loot the wealthy is "forcing our version of freedom" on you? I'll bet if you were caught burglering a house you would whine that the police were taking away your "freedom" to make a living.

I wouldn't burgle a house. But your viewpoint is one I've always found interesting in terms of encouraging corporate officers to turn a profit by any means they see fit, whether it's ethical or not just because it's their 'responsibility' to generate profit.

profit is the guide post that got us from the stone age to here. Without it we would have no idea where to invest our resources. With out profit we'd get a soviet result.
You were the lib commie defending Castro's island concentration camp -right?

Profit is one guide post among many. It's beyond simplistic to think it's the only criterion worth considering.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Addicting Info Explaining Socialism To A Republican

whats to explain?? Most Republicans know that socialism slowly starved about 120 million human beings to death.

was it socialism or just incompetent public policies?

dear they had decades and decades to try different approaches to socialism but more human being keep slowly starving to death. The instant China switched to capitalism they eliminated 40% of the world's poverty. One would have to be be a absolute total idiot or a liberal to then support socialism, and even after the Red Chinese accepted reality. Do you like national Socialism too?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Says he who knows he cannot answer my question.

I guess I'll have to reiterate since you weren't bright enough to get it the first time.

1) Freedom means different things to different people.
2) Cons are simplemindedly forcing their version of freedom for the upper class on to the rest of us.

And now a recap of your way of 'winning':

1) Misunderstand the opposing point of view.
2) Declare yourself the victor.

So declining to loot the wealthy is "forcing our version of freedom" on you? I'll bet if you were caught burglering a house you would whine that the police were taking away your "freedom" to make a living.

I wouldn't burgle a house. But your viewpoint is one I've always found interesting in terms of encouraging corporate officers to turn a profit by any means they see fit, whether it's ethical or not just because it's their 'responsibility' to generate profit.

profit is the guide post that got us from the stone age to here. Without it we would have no idea where to invest our resources. With out profit we'd get a soviet result.
You were the lib commie defending Castro's island concentration camp -right?

Profit is one guide post among many. It's beyond simplistic to think it's the only criterion worth considering.

if so why is the liberal ass so afraid to tell us what the other guide post is?? What does your fear teach you?

 

[JoeNormal]

The difference is in the harm to others.

So... in your book, it is OK to impose morality on others so long as you think it doesn't harm anyone. Hmm.

Where the fuck did you get that? Just the opposite.

So... in your book, it is OK to impose morality on others so long as you think it harms someone?

I believe you were wondering why I had a problem with right wing morality being forced on others. The reason is because that right wing morality involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else.

Your version of morality that you would impose on everyone also involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else -- and so, to oppose the RW imposition of morality for that reason, you should oppose the imposition of yours.
But, you don't.
Why?

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else? Are you aware of the shit that some corporations and financial institutions are getting away with?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

all white nationalists vote Conservative.

dear, what is a white nationalist and who are the white nationalists?

Is that a serious question?

dear, what is a white nationalist and who are the white nationalists?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Are you aware of the shit that some corporations and financial institutions are getting away with?

you mean like providing our jobs and the products that got us from the stone age to here?? See why we say liberalism is based inpure ignorance?

 

[M14 Shooter]

So... in your book, it is OK to impose morality on others so long as you think it doesn't harm anyone. Hmm.

Where the fuck did you get that? Just the opposite.

So... in your book, it is OK to impose morality on others so long as you think it harms someone?

I believe you were wondering why I had a problem with right wing morality being forced on others. The reason is because that right wing morality involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else.

Your version of morality that you would impose on everyone also involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else -- and so, to oppose the RW imposition of morality for that reason, you should oppose the imposition of yours.
But, you don't.
Why?

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else?

Yes. Like me, and the million of others like me, for instance.

 

[JoeNormal]

I guess I'll have to reiterate since you weren't bright enough to get it the first time.

1) Freedom means different things to different people.
2) Cons are simplemindedly forcing their version of freedom for the upper class on to the rest of us.

And now a recap of your way of 'winning':

1) Misunderstand the opposing point of view.
2) Declare yourself the victor.

So declining to loot the wealthy is "forcing our version of freedom" on you? I'll bet if you were caught burglering a house you would whine that the police were taking away your "freedom" to make a living.

I wouldn't burgle a house. But your viewpoint is one I've always found interesting in terms of encouraging corporate officers to turn a profit by any means they see fit, whether it's ethical or not just because it's their 'responsibility' to generate profit.

profit is the guide post that got us from the stone age to here. Without it we would have no idea where to invest our resources. With out profit we'd get a soviet result.
You were the lib commie defending Castro's island concentration camp -right?

Profit is one guide post among many. It's beyond simplistic to think it's the only criterion worth considering.

if so why is the liberal ass so afraid to tell us what the other guide post is?? What does your fear teach you?

Sustainability, quality of life, quality of environment, time to enjoy hobbies or artistic endeavors.... The list is unlimited.

 

[JoeNormal]

Where the fuck did you get that? Just the opposite.

So... in your book, it is OK to impose morality on others so long as you think it harms someone?

I believe you were wondering why I had a problem with right wing morality being forced on others. The reason is because that right wing morality involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else.

Your version of morality that you would impose on everyone also involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else -- and so, to oppose the RW imposition of morality for that reason, you should oppose the imposition of yours.
But, you don't.
Why?

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else?

Yes. Like me, and the million of others like me, for instance.

What morality do you think I would impose that would affect you (unless you happen to be a sociopath)?

 

[M14 Shooter]

So... in your book, it is OK to impose morality on others so long as you think it harms someone?

I believe you were wondering why I had a problem with right wing morality being forced on others. The reason is because that right wing morality involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else.

Your version of morality that you would impose on everyone also involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else -- and so, to oppose the RW imposition of morality for that reason, you should oppose the imposition of yours.
But, you don't.
Why?

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else?

Yes. Like me, and the million of others like me, for instance.

What morality do you think I would impose that would affect you (unless you happen to be a sociopath)?

You want the state to force me, and millions like me, to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, placing me, and millions like me, in a condition of state-enforced involuntary servitude.
This, inarguably, takes freedom from me and those millions like me; in doing so, it harms us.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So declining to loot the wealthy is "forcing our version of freedom" on you? I'll bet if you were caught burglering a house you would whine that the police were taking away your "freedom" to make a living.

I wouldn't burgle a house. But your viewpoint is one I've always found interesting in terms of encouraging corporate officers to turn a profit by any means they see fit, whether it's ethical or not just because it's their 'responsibility' to generate profit.

profit is the guide post that got us from the stone age to here. Without it we would have no idea where to invest our resources. With out profit we'd get a soviet result.
You were the lib commie defending Castro's island concentration camp -right?

Profit is one guide post among many. It's beyond simplistic to think it's the only criterion worth considering.

if so why is the liberal ass so afraid to tell us what the other guide post is?? What does your fear teach you?

Sustainability, quality of life, quality of environment, time to enjoy hobbies or artistic endeavors.... The list is unlimited.

dear, people are free to enjoy hobbies. Do you have any idea what you are trying to say? See why we say slow?

 

[JoeNormal]

Are you aware of the shit that some corporations and financial institutions are getting away with?

you mean like providing our jobs and the products that got us from the stone age to here?? See why we say liberalism is based inpure ignorance?

They provide one component among many that created our civilization. Some of the others are labor, natural resources, and technology.

 

[JoeNormal]

I believe you were wondering why I had a problem with right wing morality being forced on others. The reason is because that right wing morality involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else.

Your version of morality that you would impose on everyone also involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else -- and so, to oppose the RW imposition of morality for that reason, you should oppose the imposition of yours.
But, you don't.
Why?

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else?

Yes. Like me, and the million of others like me, for instance.

What morality do you think I would impose that would affect you (unless you happen to be a sociopath)?

You want the state to force me, and millions like me, to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, placing me, and millions like me, in a condition of state-enforced involuntary servitude.
This, inarguably, takes freedom from me and those millions like me; in doing so, it harms us.

You and the millions like you apparently see yourselves as having started from nothing and rising to the commanding heights that you enjoy today. That's not the case.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Are you aware of the shit that some corporations and financial institutions are getting away with?

you mean like providing our jobs and the products that got us from the stone age to here?? See why we say liberalism is based inpure ignorance?

They provide one component among many that created our civilization. Some of the others are labor, natural resources, and technology.

too stupid of course!! our corporations organize our labor resources and technolgy to give of, for example, 80% of all recent medical patents. Without our great Republican capitalist corporations we'd be back in the stone age or have a soviet standard of living. You're the lib commie who defends Castro's concentration camp -right?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your version of morality that you would impose on everyone also involves taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else -- and so, to oppose the RW imposition of morality for that reason, you should oppose the imposition of yours.
But, you don't.
Why?

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else?

Yes. Like me, and the million of others like me, for instance.

What morality do you think I would impose that would affect you (unless you happen to be a sociopath)?

You want the state to force me, and millions like me, to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, placing me, and millions like me, in a condition of state-enforced involuntary servitude.
This, inarguably, takes freedom from me and those millions like me; in doing so, it harms us.

You and the millions like you apparently see yourselves as having started from nothing and rising to the commanding heights that you enjoy today. That's not the case.

Irrelevant to what I said and the issue at hand.
You imposition of your morality harms us; we have not harmed anyone.
According to your standard, you should oppose it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You and the millions like you apparently see yourselves as having started from nothing and rising to the commanding heights that you enjoy today. That's not the case.

what is the case??

Barry: " you didn't build that"
Hilary: " corporations don't create jobs"

Is that where the liberal is heading?

 

[nat4900]

Very few Left Wingers can explain the failures of socialism all over the world no less be able to articulate why it is economically viable to use government to steal money from the productive to give to the unproductive.

Gee, these listed countries (and US allies) would be offended by your ignorant retort......but they do know how right wingers are just dumb jingoistic dunces.

• Denmark

• Finland

• Netherlands

• Canada

• Sweden

• Norway

• New Zealand

• Belgium

 

[JoeNormal]

Taking freedom from people who aren't harming anyone else?

Yes. Like me, and the million of others like me, for instance.

What morality do you think I would impose that would affect you (unless you happen to be a sociopath)?

You want the state to force me, and millions like me, to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, placing me, and millions like me, in a condition of state-enforced involuntary servitude.
This, inarguably, takes freedom from me and those millions like me; in doing so, it harms us.

You and the millions like you apparently see yourselves as having started from nothing and rising to the commanding heights that you enjoy today. That's not the case.

Irrelevant to what I said and the issue at hand.
You imposition of your morality harms us; we have not harmed anyone.
According to your standard, you should oppose it.

In a large society, there will be a certain portion who fall on hard times. That's the downside of society. (The upside is that a whole bunch of good things are created like technology, art, medicine, etc.) There needs to be a way to mitigate the downside and unfortunately, you don't like it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Very few Left Wingers can explain the failures of socialism all over the world no less be able to articulate why it is economically viable to use government to steal money from the productive to give to the unproductive.

Gee, these listed countries (and IS allies) would be offended by your ignorant retort......but they do know how right wingers are just dumb jingoistic dunces.

• Denmark

• Finland

• Netherlands

• Canada

• Sweden

• Norway

• New Zealand

• Belgium

actually we have higher corporate taxes than all of them so arguably are more socialist than they are.