I don’t understand why republicans are so selective about the definition of socialism

[Oldstyle]

The "Taisho Democracy" is named for the Emperor who ruled at that time you buffoon! An Emperor who was noteworthy for being a weak sickly ruler during who's time as Emperor was marked by his allowing the Diet to effectively rule for him. That in no way means that Japan was a democracy. Claiming it was simply shows how clueless you are about Japanese history!

Okay, you realize that the Taisho Emperor (AKA Yoshihito) was a figurehead. He as much ruled Japan as George V ruled England. The point was, the Diet was elected. There were party politics and Prime Ministers were selected.

Seriously, do you take special pills to be this fucking stupid?

Hundreds of thousands of Americans died fighting in a war amongst ourselves to end slavery! You might have heard about it? The Civil War? Duh?

Um, repeating what I just said with indignation is not a point.

Yes, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE died in the Civil War that was ONLY fought because a few rich people wanted to keep owning slaves, and got a bunch of stupid white people to fight for them. Kind of like the modern GOP.

You think the Civil War was ONLY fought over slavery? I can see how someone who isn't a history major might make that mistake, Joey but I'm embarrassed for you when you take that kind of simplistic view of what caused the Civil War! If you REALLY knew your history you'd know that President Andrew Jackson was forced to send warships into Charleston Harbor when South Carolina threatened to secede from the United States over the imposition of tariffs which forced Southerners to buy higher priced goods from the North rather than from Europe. That took place 30 years before the advent of the Civil War and had nothing to do with slavery but everything to do with State's rights. I would suggest reading up on the "Nullification Crisis"?

 

[JoeB131]

You think the Civil War was ONLY fought over slavery?

Yes. The Civil War was ONLY about slavery. All this shit about "States Rights" and "Economic Oppression" was shit the "Lost Cause" mythology bunch inserted in while they were trying to ratchet back all the freedoms blacks had just won.

I can see how someone who isn't a history major might make that mistake, Joey but I'm embarrassed for you when you take that kind of simplistic view of what caused the Civil War!

I'm sorry you buy into RACIST revsionist propaganda, but not surprised.

 

[Oldstyle]

You think the Civil War was ONLY fought over slavery?

Yes. The Civil War was ONLY about slavery. All this shit about "States Rights" and "Economic Oppression" was shit the "Lost Cause" mythology bunch inserted in while they were trying to ratchet back all the freedoms blacks had just won.

I can see how someone who isn't a history major might make that mistake, Joey but I'm embarrassed for you when you take that kind of simplistic view of what caused the Civil War!

I'm sorry you buy into RACIST revsionist propaganda, but not surprised.

So the North didn't force higher prices on the South 30 years before civil war broke out? Andrew Jackson didn't send navy warships to a southern port to impose those tariffs on the South? The abolitionist movement was the spark that ignited the Civil war but there were huge animosities between the North and South on other issues than just slavery. I'm sorry you're too intellectually shallow to grasp that concept!

 

[JoeB131]

So the North didn't force higher prices on the South 30 years before civil war broke out?

I'm sure they did. NOthing to do with the Civil War. That had to do with the Republicans electing an outright ABOLITIONIST as President.

 

[Oldstyle]

So the North didn't force higher prices on the South 30 years before civil war broke out?

I'm sure they did. NOthing to do with the Civil War. That had to do with the Republicans electing an outright ABOLITIONIST as President.

Really, Joey? So South Carolina claiming it had the right to reject Federal statutes and the Federal Government sending the military to tell them they DIDN'T have that right doesn't sound exactly how the Civil War would begin three decades later?

 

[Oldstyle]

The reason that the Civil War was referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression" in the South was that Southerners felt the North was imposing things on them legislatively that they didn't want! Yes that included abolishing slavery but it went far deeper than that. The Nullification Crisis was just one indication of that schism between the North and the South.

 

[theHawk]

To them, it’s a completely leftwing ideology when in reality it’s been part of the framework of the country since the beginning. The founders had socialist ideas after all. They basically were leftists. It’s also stupid to say that communism and socialism are the same thing when in reality communism is simply an example of socialism. Socialism itself is a very broad term that can’t be defined simply.

Also, isn’t Trump the bigger socialist than Obama? His bailout to farmers was twice as big as Obama’s bailout. Are republicans going to pretend that isn’t socialism?

Dems seem to pretty selective about what “socialist” countries they use as examples of “good socialism”. They always use some Euro country they have never been to. They never seem to cite Latin American countries like Cuba, nor do they cite African countries. I wonder why that is? Could it be...racism?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

To them, it’s a completely leftwing ideology when in reality it’s been part of the framework of the country since the beginning. The founders had socialist ideas after all. They basically were leftists. It’s also stupid to say that communism and socialism are the same thing when in reality communism is simply an example of socialism. Socialism itself is a very broad term that can’t be defined simply.

Also, isn’t Trump the bigger socialist than Obama? His bailout to farmers was twice as big as Obama’s bailout. Are republicans going to pretend that isn’t socialism?

Rs want the benefits from our Socialist Democracy but not want to pay for their fair share. Nor do they want the 1% to pay for theirs.

 

[Billy000]

To them, it’s a completely leftwing ideology when in reality it’s been part of the framework of the country since the beginning. The founders had socialist ideas after all. They basically were leftists. It’s also stupid to say that communism and socialism are the same thing when in reality communism is simply an example of socialism. Socialism itself is a very broad term that can’t be defined simply.

Also, isn’t Trump the bigger socialist than Obama? His bailout to farmers was twice as big as Obama’s bailout. Are republicans going to pretend that isn’t socialism?

Dems seem to pretty selective about what “socialist” countries they use as examples of “good socialism”. They always use some Euro country they have never been to. They never seem to cite Latin American countries like Cuba, nor do they cite African countries. I wonder why that is? Could it be...racism?

Definitely not racism. A country is successful or it isn’t. More importantly, socialists don’t claim any socialist state is successful.

 

[JoeB131]

Really, Joey? So South Carolina claiming it had the right to reject Federal statutes and the Federal Government sending the military to tell them they DIDN'T have that right doesn't sound exactly how the Civil War would begin three decades later?

They didn't revolt 30 years later over tariffs. They revolted 30 years later because Lincoln and the Republicans hated slavery.

Kind of amusing the Party of Lincoln is now the party of Trump, who probably considers the 13th Amendment was a mistake.

The reason that the Civil War was referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression" in the South was that Southerners felt the North was imposing things on them legislatively that they didn't want! Yes that included abolishing slavery but it went far deeper than that. The Nullification Crisis was just one indication of that schism between the North and the South.

That term really wasn't bandied around until AFTER the Civil War and the dumbasses who didn't want a newly freed Negro dating their sister tried to rewrite history.

 

[Oldstyle]

Really, Joey? So South Carolina claiming it had the right to reject Federal statutes and the Federal Government sending the military to tell them they DIDN'T have that right doesn't sound exactly how the Civil War would begin three decades later?

They didn't revolt 30 years later over tariffs. They revolted 30 years later because Lincoln and the Republicans hated slavery.

Kind of amusing the Party of Lincoln is now the party of Trump, who probably considers the 13th Amendment was a mistake.

The reason that the Civil War was referred to as the "War of Northern Aggression" in the South was that Southerners felt the North was imposing things on them legislatively that they didn't want! Yes that included abolishing slavery but it went far deeper than that. The Nullification Crisis was just one indication of that schism between the North and the South.

That term really wasn't bandied around until AFTER the Civil War and the dumbasses who didn't want a newly freed Negro dating their sister tried to rewrite history.

Use your head for once, Joey! In actuality very few Southerners owned slaves. The conflict wasn't just over slavery...it was also over whether individual States had the right to drop out of the United States if they didn't like legislation that the Federal Government was passing. The average Southerner didn't own slaves but all of them had been forced by the Northern States to pay substantially more when the Federal Government imposed tariffs on goods being imported from Europe. That was the issue poor Southerners were angered by thirty years prior to war breaking out. That was the issue that they were willing to fight and die over.

 

[Oldstyle]

To them, it’s a completely leftwing ideology when in reality it’s been part of the framework of the country since the beginning. The founders had socialist ideas after all. They basically were leftists. It’s also stupid to say that communism and socialism are the same thing when in reality communism is simply an example of socialism. Socialism itself is a very broad term that can’t be defined simply.

Also, isn’t Trump the bigger socialist than Obama? His bailout to farmers was twice as big as Obama’s bailout. Are republicans going to pretend that isn’t socialism?

Dems seem to pretty selective about what “socialist” countries they use as examples of “good socialism”. They always use some Euro country they have never been to. They never seem to cite Latin American countries like Cuba, nor do they cite African countries. I wonder why that is? Could it be...racism?

Definitely not racism. A country is successful or it isn’t. More importantly, socialists don’t claim any socialist state is successful.

If socialist states aren't "successful" then why are you liberals trying to turn us into one? Duh?

 

[JoeB131]

Use your head for once, Joey! In actuality very few Southerners owned slaves. The conflict wasn't just over slavery..

You miss the point about why the dumb-ass inbred rednecks all died for the south. Most of them didn't own slaves, but they sure as fuck didn't want them to be equal and possibly fuck their sisters. It's the kind of dumb-ass self-defeating racism that white conservatives practice to this very day.

The average Southerner didn't own slaves but all of them had been forced by the Northern States to pay substantially more when the Federal Government imposed tariffs on goods being imported from Europe.

Do you think the average Southerner was importing fine luxury goods from Europe? Nope, that mostly benefited the wealth white plantation owners, too.

 

[Oldstyle]

Use your head for once, Joey! In actuality very few Southerners owned slaves. The conflict wasn't just over slavery..

You miss the point about why the dumb-ass inbred rednecks all died for the south. Most of them didn't own slaves, but they sure as fuck didn't want them to be equal and possibly fuck their sisters. It's the kind of dumb-ass self-defeating racism that white conservatives practice to this very day.

The average Southerner didn't own slaves but all of them had been forced by the Northern States to pay substantially more when the Federal Government imposed tariffs on goods being imported from Europe.

Do you think the average Southerner was importing fine luxury goods from Europe? Nope, that mostly benefited the wealth white plantation owners, too.

The average Southerner was growing cotton. Cotton was the overwhelming cash crop of the South. Not just for large plantations but for smaller farms as well. Then they were selling that cotton to Europe in exchange for clothing and other goods that wasn't being manufactured in the South. The North passed tariffs to force Southerners to buy the goods that were being produced in mills in the North at a cost that was nearly double what those same things would have cost in exchange for cotton in Europe. We're not talking about "fine luxury goods" we're talking about basic necessities that ALL Southerners would need! It was a sleazy thing to do but the North did it anyways and the South was outraged about it!

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm amused by your beliefs that it was the red neck Southerners that wanted to keep blacks in their place, Joey! Lincoln was no great champion of the black race as Americans. His idea was that if they were emancipated that it would be best if they would leave America and colonize Africa or South America. Funny how THAT's always left out of the Lincoln saga!

 

[JoeB131]

The average Southerner was growing cotton. Cotton was the overwhelming cash crop of the South. Not just for large plantations but for smaller farms as well. Then they were selling that cotton to Europe in exchange for clothing and other goods that wasn't being manufactured in the South. The North passed tariffs to force Southerners to buy the goods that were being produced in mills in the North at a cost that was nearly double what those same things would have cost in exchange for cotton in Europe. We're not talking about "fine luxury goods" we're talking about basic necessities that ALL Southerners would need! It was a sleazy thing to do but the North did it anyways and the South was outraged about it!

Most clothing was being manufactured in the north, and that was fine. It was cheaper to get clothes from the North than Europe. You realize that just not that much could be moved by sailing ships, right.

Nope, Cleetus and Billy Bob weren't upset they had to pay extra for those fine European duds... they were upset that a free black man might want to have sex with their daughters.... and their daughters might be into it because they had bigger dicks. It was totally a dick thing.

I'm amused by your beliefs that it was the red neck Southerners that wanted to keep blacks in their place, Joey!

Um, yeah, 400 years of Southern Racism, to this very day. I think you rednecks are still in shock over this.

Lincoln was no great champion of the black race as Americans. His idea was that if they were emancipated that it would be best if they would leave America and colonize Africa or South America. Funny how THAT's always left out of the Lincoln saga!

It's funny to watch so-called Republicans slander Lincoln and praise Trump.

Anyway, this was never a very serious plan... pretty much abandoned by the end of the Civil War.

 

[Oldstyle]

The average Southerner was growing cotton. Cotton was the overwhelming cash crop of the South. Not just for large plantations but for smaller farms as well. Then they were selling that cotton to Europe in exchange for clothing and other goods that wasn't being manufactured in the South. The North passed tariffs to force Southerners to buy the goods that were being produced in mills in the North at a cost that was nearly double what those same things would have cost in exchange for cotton in Europe. We're not talking about "fine luxury goods" we're talking about basic necessities that ALL Southerners would need! It was a sleazy thing to do but the North did it anyways and the South was outraged about it!

Most clothing was being manufactured in the north, and that was fine. It was cheaper to get clothes from the North than Europe. You realize that just not that much could be moved by sailing ships, right.

Nope, Cleetus and Billy Bob weren't upset they had to pay extra for those fine European duds... they were upset that a free black man might want to have sex with their daughters.... and their daughters might be into it because they had bigger dicks. It was totally a dick thing.

I'm amused by your beliefs that it was the red neck Southerners that wanted to keep blacks in their place, Joey!

Um, yeah, 400 years of Southern Racism, to this very day. I think you rednecks are still in shock over this.
View attachment 309277

Lincoln was no great champion of the black race as Americans. His idea was that if they were emancipated that it would be best if they would leave America and colonize Africa or South America. Funny how THAT's always left out of the Lincoln saga!

It's funny to watch so-called Republicans slander Lincoln and praise Trump.

Anyway, this was never a very serious plan... pretty much abandoned by the end of the Civil War.

Did you learn it was a "dick thing" in one of your college courses, Joey? Your university must be so proud to have faculty teaching such profound wisdom in it's classrooms!

I'm not slandering Lincoln...I'm trying to explain to someone who's obviously clueless about Lincoln's positions regarding slavery that he was never "all in" on freeing the slaves! In truth his Emancipation Proclamation didn't free a single slave. Why? Because it only applied to slaves being held in States controlled by the Confederacy. It was done as a military strategy more than anything else. If it wasn't...it would have applied to slaves EVERYWHERE!

 

[Oldstyle]

The average Southerner was growing cotton. Cotton was the overwhelming cash crop of the South. Not just for large plantations but for smaller farms as well. Then they were selling that cotton to Europe in exchange for clothing and other goods that wasn't being manufactured in the South. The North passed tariffs to force Southerners to buy the goods that were being produced in mills in the North at a cost that was nearly double what those same things would have cost in exchange for cotton in Europe. We're not talking about "fine luxury goods" we're talking about basic necessities that ALL Southerners would need! It was a sleazy thing to do but the North did it anyways and the South was outraged about it!

Most clothing was being manufactured in the north, and that was fine. It was cheaper to get clothes from the North than Europe. You realize that just not that much could be moved by sailing ships, right.

Nope, Cleetus and Billy Bob weren't upset they had to pay extra for those fine European duds... they were upset that a free black man might want to have sex with their daughters.... and their daughters might be into it because they had bigger dicks. It was totally a dick thing.

I'm amused by your beliefs that it was the red neck Southerners that wanted to keep blacks in their place, Joey!

Um, yeah, 400 years of Southern Racism, to this very day. I think you rednecks are still in shock over this.
View attachment 309277

Lincoln was no great champion of the black race as Americans. His idea was that if they were emancipated that it would be best if they would leave America and colonize Africa or South America. Funny how THAT's always left out of the Lincoln saga!

It's funny to watch so-called Republicans slander Lincoln and praise Trump.

Anyway, this was never a very serious plan... pretty much abandoned by the end of the Civil War.

It was only cheaper to buy goods from the North AFTER the North imposed tariffs on goods imported from Europe! Before they imposed those tariffs...people in the South could trade cotton for European goods at rates that were far cheaper for them. How do you think that went over with the average Southerner, Joey? THINK for a change!!! Or did your sorry excuse for a college education not teach you how to do that? (eye roll)

 

[easyt65]

"I don’t understand why republicans are so selective about the definition of socialism"

Is this seriously how snowflakes are still attempting to defend supporting Bernie 'Fidel Castro FanBoy' Sanders as the 'face' / 'leader' of the new Liberal Progressive Socialist Democratic party?

Bwuhahahahaha.....good luck with that.

.

 

[JoeB131]

Did you learn it was a "dick thing" in one of your college courses, Joey? Your university must be so proud to have faculty teaching such profound wisdom in it's classrooms!

Again, when I was in College, I was pretty conservative. What cured me of that was working for REpublican Assholes in corner offices.

I'm not slandering Lincoln...I'm trying to explain to someone who's obviously clueless about Lincoln's positions regarding slavery that he was never "all in" on freeing the slaves! In truth his Emancipation Proclamation didn't free a single slave. Why? Because it only applied to slaves being held in States controlled by the Confederacy. It was done as a military strategy more than anything else. If it wasn't...it would have applied to slaves EVERYWHERE!

Yawn, this is the typical Southern Apologist crap we've all heard for years... and it's boring. The fact is, Lincoln DID set the stage for freeing the slaves including pushing for the 13th Amendment.

It was only cheaper to buy goods from the North AFTER the North imposed tariffs on goods imported from Europe! Before they imposed those tariffs...people in the South could trade cotton for European goods at rates that were far cheaper for them. How do you think that went over with the average Southerner, Joey? THINK for a change!!! Or did your sorry excuse for a college education not teach you how to do that? (eye roll)

Guy, we've heard this shit from the Confederate Apologists for years, and it really holds as much weight with me as those ASSHOLES who claim the Holocaust never happened.

The Civil War wasn't about "Tariffs", it was about slavery. This is what the leaders of the Confederacy had to say about it.