Next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...

[danielpalos]

I believe that wanting regulation of the means of production is enough to make one a socialist...

What you believe is irrelevant. The word already has a clear definition.

I still don't get why you're playing games with definition (unless the intent is deliberate obfuscation). Why not call your ideology something more accurate, or make a term? Then you won't have to be forever correcting people who don't know your "very special" definition. Doesn't it get old having to say "No, i'm not THAT kind of socialist."?

how about national capitalist? the right wing claims to be for capitalism, but national socialism is all they actually know.

Who is using the term national capitalist besides you?

If you stick to the definitions that are actually in the dictionary then what you post won't sound like gibberish

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

 

[Blues Man]

Why is it people with nothing to say rate posts as funny?

 

[Blues Man]

I believe that wanting regulation of the means of production is enough to make one a socialist...

What you believe is irrelevant. The word already has a clear definition.

I still don't get why you're playing games with definition (unless the intent is deliberate obfuscation). Why not call your ideology something more accurate, or make a term? Then you won't have to be forever correcting people who don't know your "very special" definition. Doesn't it get old having to say "No, i'm not THAT kind of socialist."?

how about national capitalist? the right wing claims to be for capitalism, but national socialism is all they actually know.

Who is using the term national capitalist besides you?

If you stick to the definitions that are actually in the dictionary then what you post won't sound like gibberish

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

 

[Blues Man]

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”

Winston Churchill

 

[danielpalos]

I believe that wanting regulation of the means of production is enough to make one a socialist...

What you believe is irrelevant. The word already has a clear definition.

I still don't get why you're playing games with definition (unless the intent is deliberate obfuscation). Why not call your ideology something more accurate, or make a term? Then you won't have to be forever correcting people who don't know your "very special" definition. Doesn't it get old having to say "No, i'm not THAT kind of socialist."?

how about national capitalist? the right wing claims to be for capitalism, but national socialism is all they actually know.

Who is using the term national capitalist besides you?

If you stick to the definitions that are actually in the dictionary then what you post won't sound like gibberish

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

requiring a license to do business in public accommodation is national capitalism not national socialism.

black codes and walls are national socialism and have nothing to do with "capitalism".

 

[Blues Man]

What you believe is irrelevant. The word already has a clear definition.

I still don't get why you're playing games with definition (unless the intent is deliberate obfuscation). Why not call your ideology something more accurate, or make a term? Then you won't have to be forever correcting people who don't know your "very special" definition. Doesn't it get old having to say "No, i'm not THAT kind of socialist."?

how about national capitalist? the right wing claims to be for capitalism, but national socialism is all they actually know.

Who is using the term national capitalist besides you?

If you stick to the definitions that are actually in the dictionary then what you post won't sound like gibberish

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

requiring a license to do business in public accommodation is national capitalism not national socialism.

black codes and walls are national socialism and have nothing to do with "capitalism".

No it's not.

But you keep making up definitions if it makes you feel smart

 

[danielpalos]

how about national capitalist? the right wing claims to be for capitalism, but national socialism is all they actually know.

Who is using the term national capitalist besides you?

If you stick to the definitions that are actually in the dictionary then what you post won't sound like gibberish

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

requiring a license to do business in public accommodation is national capitalism not national socialism.

black codes and walls are national socialism and have nothing to do with "capitalism".

No it's not.

But you keep making up definitions if it makes you feel smart

they are clear; you have no rebuttal and are asking no questions for clarification.

why should I take Your bigotry seriously when You merely and Only have fallacy not any form of argument?

 

[dannyboys]

Capitalism, you say?

Um, no....

https://www.mackinac.org/archives/1998/sp1998-01.pdf

So your argument is a picture of a book you never read which is probably Rockefeller or Carnegie propaganda
. Congratulations.

 

[Blues Man]

Who is using the term national capitalist besides you?

If you stick to the definitions that are actually in the dictionary then what you post won't sound like gibberish

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

requiring a license to do business in public accommodation is national capitalism not national socialism.

black codes and walls are national socialism and have nothing to do with "capitalism".

No it's not.

But you keep making up definitions if it makes you feel smart

they are clear; you have no rebuttal and are asking no questions for clarification.

why should I take Your bigotry seriously when merely and Only have fallacy not any form of argument?

You do realize that licenses to do business are state and local not federal don't you?

There aren't many federal licenses needed to business or many businesses that are required to hold them

The very definition of capitalism is that the means of production is in the hands of the public (the private sector) not the government. That businesses must follow certain laws of operation does not change the definition

ANd you call me a bigot but I have the feeling you don;t know the definition of that word either.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism, you say?

Um, no....

https://www.mackinac.org/archives/1998/sp1998-01.pdf

So your argument is a picture of a book you never read which is probably Rockefeller or Carnegie propaganda
. Congratulations.

Right wing management does that.

A left winger like FDR would have "mobilized entire Corps of the People to upgrade our economy for modern times".

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

why should I take Your bigotry seriously when You merely and Only have fallacy not any form of argument?

What bigotry?

You know the purpose of identifying fallacy is so you can formulate a proper counter-argument? Identifying the fallacy alone does not defeat the argument.

That is like a doctor identifying symptoms and declaring a patient cured, without diagnosing the disease and treating it.

Do you have ANY counter-argument, or are you going to appeal to fallacy again?

 

[danielpalos]

for comparison and contrast, right wingers.

that is the comparative difference in forms of public policy; national capitalism or national socialism.

guess which one the right wing favors, for contrast.

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

requiring a license to do business in public accommodation is national capitalism not national socialism.

black codes and walls are national socialism and have nothing to do with "capitalism".

No it's not.

But you keep making up definitions if it makes you feel smart

they are clear; you have no rebuttal and are asking no questions for clarification.

why should I take Your bigotry seriously when merely and Only have fallacy not any form of argument?

You do realize that licenses to do business are state and local not federal don't you?

There aren't many federal licenses needed to business or many businesses that are required to hold them

The very definition of capitalism is that the means of production is in the hands of the public (the private sector) not the government. That businesses must follow certain laws of operation does not change the definition

ANd you call me a bigot but I have the feeling you don;t know the definition of that word either.

you merely quibble about degree of Socialism. Socialism is like Palmolive; we are soaking in it.

 

[danielpalos]

why should I take Your bigotry seriously when You merely and Only have fallacy not any form of argument?

What bigotry?

You know the purpose of identifying fallacy is so you can formulate a proper counter-argument? Identifying the fallacy alone does not defeat the argument.

That is like a doctor identifying symptoms and declaring a patient cured, without diagnosing the disease and treating it.

Do you have ANY counter-argument, or are you going to appeal to fallacy again?

you need an argument, not just fallacy (of ad hominem) like any right winger.

the right wing is clueless and Causeless about economics. And, they don't Care.

the left are National Capitalists compared to the National Socialist right wing.

Government is socialism.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

Only command economies do that.

 

[Dragonlady]

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”

Winston Churchill

You do know that Winston Churchill was a total and abject failure in managing the economy or the country during times of peace, don't you? The man didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground economically. He was born to the House of Lords class, and was an elitist of the first order. But he was only Prime Minister I would ever want while the country is at war.

It is foolish and unwise to quote Winston Churchill to anyone who lived while he was PM or has read his biography. I recommend William Manchester's wonderful books on WWII.

 

[Blues Man]

National capitalism is a phrase that has never been used to describe any political dogma.

Capitalism is not and cannot be nationalized as it's roots are based on the individual or the private sector holding of the means of production not the collective or the government

requiring a license to do business in public accommodation is national capitalism not national socialism.

black codes and walls are national socialism and have nothing to do with "capitalism".

No it's not.

But you keep making up definitions if it makes you feel smart

they are clear; you have no rebuttal and are asking no questions for clarification.

why should I take Your bigotry seriously when merely and Only have fallacy not any form of argument?

You do realize that licenses to do business are state and local not federal don't you?

There aren't many federal licenses needed to business or many businesses that are required to hold them

The very definition of capitalism is that the means of production is in the hands of the public (the private sector) not the government. That businesses must follow certain laws of operation does not change the definition

ANd you call me a bigot but I have the feeling you don;t know the definition of that word either.

you merely quibble about degree of Socialism. Socialism is like Palmolive; we are soaking in it.

You people define everything the government does as socialism but we all know you don't use the proper definition of the word

 

[Blues Man]

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”

Winston Churchill

You do know that Winston Churchill was a total and abject failure in managing the economy or the country during times of peace, don't you? The man didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground economically. He was born to the House of Lords class, and was an elitist of the first order. But he was only Prime Minister I would ever want while the country is at war.

It is foolish and unwise to quote Winston Churchill to anyone who lived while he was PM or has read his biography. I recommend William Manchester's wonderful books on WWII.

And that in no way means he was wrong about socialism.

I know doctors who can't run the day to day business of medicine but that in no way means they are not damn good doctors does it?

 

[dblack]

Piss off troll.

even Ogres have better arguments than You. why allege to be serious.

Piss off troll.

you need an argument, not just fallacy (of ad hominem) like any right winger.

the right wing is clueless and Causeless about economics. And, they don't Care.

the left are National Capitalists compared to the National Socialist right wing.

Government is socialism.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

Only command economies do that.

Piss off troll.

in other words, You got Nothing; but blame me for being Troll.

even Ogres argue better than you.

In other words, I got nothing for trolls. Piss off.

 

[francoHFW]

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”

Winston Churchill

You do know that Winston Churchill was a total and abject failure in managing the economy or the country during times of peace, don't you? The man didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground economically. He was born to the House of Lords class, and was an elitist of the first order. But he was only Prime Minister I would ever want while the country is at war.

It is foolish and unwise to quote Winston Churchill to anyone who lived while he was PM or has read his biography. I recommend William Manchester's wonderful books on WWII.

And that in no way means he was wrong about socialism.

I know doctors who can't run the day to day business of medicine but that in no way means they are not damn good doctors does it?

He was talking about communism and so are you... The definition of socialism has moved on to always democratic fair capitalism with a good safety net. Like every successful modern country except us. We have the worst inequality and upward mobility and safety-net going. Thanks scumbag greedy idiot brainwashing GOP and silly dupes like you....

 

[badger2]

In post #866 FranvcoHFW wrote: 'We are the only country that believes that socialism is communism and vice versa.' This is proof that F did not read nor understand post #773, which excerpt was written by two communists.

 

[Dragonlady]

“Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”

Winston Churchill

You do know that Winston Churchill was a total and abject failure in managing the economy or the country during times of peace, don't you? The man didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground economically. He was born to the House of Lords class, and was an elitist of the first order. But he was only Prime Minister I would ever want while the country is at war.

It is foolish and unwise to quote Winston Churchill to anyone who lived while he was PM or has read his biography. I recommend William Manchester's wonderful books on WWII.

And that in no way means he was wrong about socialism.

I know doctors who can't run the day to day business of medicine but that in no way means they are not damn good doctors does it?

Yes it does. Because if you aren't capable of being organized, efficient, and effective in managing your team, then you're NOT a good doctor, regardless of how much medical knowledge you have.

Knowing the law doesn't make you a good lawyer. Knowing how to apply the law, completing your files in a timely way and getting the best results possible for your clients makes you a good lawyer.

If not for his leadership in WWII, Churchill's political career would have been viewed as a failure.