Socialism in action

[dblack]

Thread had the intended effect. Look at all the tards rushing in to defend SOCIALISM lol

the GOP has debased the word socialism by using it for name calling.

Socialism = worker ownership of means of production

The human mind is the ultimate means of production. That's what socialists want to control.

I really advise anyone interested in learning more about modern socialists in the US to read the "What is Democratic Socialism" page at DSA.

They start out with the claim that they "believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically". Probably what stands out here is the idea that they want government to run the economy. But they also say they want government to "run" society. Where the hell does that come from? The purpose of government, in my view, is to protect our freedom to create, and run, the kind of society we want as individuals collaborating freely. Government is not - or in my view should not be - a tool to dictate how society will operate. But that's the goal of democratic socialists.

Later, in the Q & A they try to walk it back:

Doesn’t socialism mean that the government will own and run everything?
Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.

Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.

Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned. While we believe that democratic planning can shape major social investments like mass transit, housing, and energy, market mechanisms are needed to determine the demand for many consumer goods.

So, if you had to characterize that answer, overall, as a "yes" or a "no", what would you go with? It sort of sounds like a denial, as it starts out saying they "do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy". But the rest of the answer goes on to explain why it's necessary, despite what they "want".

Their answer to the question of whether their ideal government would own and run everything is really "Yes, but ..." - because that is exactly what they're after.

 

[dudmuck]

Thread had the intended effect. Look at all the tards rushing in to defend SOCIALISM lol

the GOP has debased the word socialism by using it for name calling.

Socialism = worker ownership of means of production

The human mind is the ultimate means of production. That's what socialists want to control.

I really advise anyone interested in learning more about modern socialists in the US to read the "What is Democratic Socialism" page at DSA.

They start out with the claim that they "believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically". Probably what stands out here is the idea that they want government to run the economy. But they also say they want government to "run" society. Where the hell does that come from? The purpose of government, in my view, is to protect our freedom to create, and run, the kind of society we want as individuals collaborating freely. Government is not - or in my view should not be - a tool to dictate how society will operate. But that's the goal of democratic socialists.

Later, in the Q & A they try to walk it back:

Doesn’t socialism mean that the government will own and run everything?
Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.

Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.

Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned. While we believe that democratic planning can shape major social investments like mass transit, housing, and energy, market mechanisms are needed to determine the demand for many consumer goods.

So, if you had to characterize that answer, overall, as a "yes" or a "no", what would you go with? It sort of sounds like a denial, as it starts out saying they "do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy". But the rest of the answer goes on to explain why it's necessary, despite what they "want".

Their answer to the question of whether their ideal government would own and run everything is really "Yes, but ..." - because that is exactly what they're after.

Then just keep slaving away for your corporate overlords.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

View attachment 284461

Nothing is free and the results often reflect this.

 

[OKTexas]

Socialism is your bank bailouts of 07-08 under both "conservative" and "liberal" administrations. Socialism is publicly funded stadiums/cathedrals for uber wealthy pro sports team owners. Socialism is what farmers are receiving now to offset the hit they are taking on Don's "China trade war" shtick. Socialism is what we do for folks like Jeff Bezos and the Walton family. America has a long and rich history of socialism woven through our economic system, we just reserve socialism in the US for the proper class of folk.

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the "job creator" class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Capital is afraid their little sham of the past half century may get disrupted:

Wow, great piece of propaganda, tell the class how much of those productivity advances were due to technology and automation, they seem to have left them out of the computation.

.

 

[dblack]

Thread had the intended effect. Look at all the tards rushing in to defend SOCIALISM lol

the GOP has debased the word socialism by using it for name calling.

Socialism = worker ownership of means of production

The human mind is the ultimate means of production. That's what socialists want to control.

I really advise anyone interested in learning more about modern socialists in the US to read the "What is Democratic Socialism" page at DSA.

They start out with the claim that they "believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically". Probably what stands out here is the idea that they want government to run the economy. But they also say they want government to "run" society. Where the hell does that come from? The purpose of government, in my view, is to protect our freedom to create, and run, the kind of society we want as individuals collaborating freely. Government is not - or in my view should not be - a tool to dictate how society will operate. But that's the goal of democratic socialists.

Later, in the Q & A they try to walk it back:

Doesn’t socialism mean that the government will own and run everything?
Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.

Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.

Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned. While we believe that democratic planning can shape major social investments like mass transit, housing, and energy, market mechanisms are needed to determine the demand for many consumer goods.

So, if you had to characterize that answer, overall, as a "yes" or a "no", what would you go with? It sort of sounds like a denial, as it starts out saying they "do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy". But the rest of the answer goes on to explain why it's necessary, despite what they "want".

Their answer to the question of whether their ideal government would own and run everything is really "Yes, but ..." - because that is exactly what they're after.

Then just keep slaving away for your corporate overlords.

No thanks.

 

[Likkmee]

View attachment 284461

Nothing is free and the results often reflect this.

What's a matter pops/ Social Security check didn't show ?

 

[regent]

I take it liberals are upset because Trump has eliminated all socialism in the United States. Are we now the only nation on this globe that has no socialism?

 

[regent]

Socialism only works in fairytales

Can you name the nations on this globe that have no socialism?

 

[Rustic]

Socialism only works in fairytales

Can you name the nations on this globe that have no socialism?

Socialism is the fatal flaw of all civilization... fact

 

[regent]

Socialism only works in fairytales

Can you name the nations on this globe that have no socialism?

Socialism is the fatal flaw of all civilization...

If a fatal flaw surely a nation would get rid of socialism. I wonder how long America has had socialism?

 

[Rustic]

Socialism only works in fairytales

Can you name the nations on this globe that have no socialism?

Socialism is the fatal flaw of all civilization...

If a fatal flaw surely a nation would get rid of socialism. I wonder how long America has had socialism?

Lol
Socialism cannot bear its own weight end of story

 

[satrebil]

Socialism is your bank bailouts of 07-08 under both "conservative" and "liberal" administrations. Socialism is publicly funded stadiums/cathedrals for uber wealthy pro sports team owners. Socialism is what farmers are receiving now to offset the hit they are taking on Don's "China trade war" shtick. Socialism is what we do for folks like Jeff Bezos and the Walton family. America has a long and rich history of socialism woven through our economic system, we just reserve socialism in the US for the proper class of folk.

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the "job creator" class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Capital is afraid their little sham of the past half century may get disrupted:

1) The "bailouts" were bullshit and never should have happened.
2) Tax incentives are not socialism.
3) No country in the history of the planet started out as socialist. Do you know why? Because it's impossible. It's also why every socialist nation eventually fails.

 

[basquebromance]

brothers and sisters: Under capitalism, rich people become powerful. Under socialism, powerful people become rich

 

[basquebromance]

there would be no Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, Microsoft or Apple under socialism, my friends!

 

[basquebromance]

Norway is the only socialist country that is wealthy, and they are wealthy because they have oil, not because they are socialist

 

[Zorro!]

View attachment 284461

Nothing is free and the results often reflect this.

OUT ON A LIMB: San Francisco And NYC Begin To See The Ugly Side Of Socialism.

 

[regent]

So why hasn't the Trump administration gotten rid of anything that smells of socialism?

 

[The Original Tree]

The banks should have been allowed to fail period.

Socialism is your bank bailouts of 07-08 under both "conservative" and "liberal" administrations. Socialism is publicly funded stadiums/cathedrals for uber wealthy pro sports team owners. Socialism is what farmers are receiving now to offset the hit they are taking on Don's "China trade war" shtick. Socialism is what we do for folks like Jeff Bezos and the Walton family. America has a long and rich history of socialism woven through our economic system, we just reserve socialism in the US for the proper class of folk.

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the "job creator" class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Capital is afraid their little sham of the past half century may get disrupted:

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So why hasn't the Trump administration gotten rid of anything that smells of socialism?

They have. Tons of bullshit regulations have been rescinded or altered to reflect a free society!

Outside of that it requires a congress to work FOR THE PEOPLE and not for themselves to create lasting change. Just like it took a congress to institute many of the quasi socialist programs we have now.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The banks should have been allowed to fail period.

Socialism is your bank bailouts of 07-08 under both "conservative" and "liberal" administrations. Socialism is publicly funded stadiums/cathedrals for uber wealthy pro sports team owners. Socialism is what farmers are receiving now to offset the hit they are taking on Don's "China trade war" shtick. Socialism is what we do for folks like Jeff Bezos and the Walton family. America has a long and rich history of socialism woven through our economic system, we just reserve socialism in the US for the proper class of folk.

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the "job creator" class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Capital is afraid their little sham of the past half century may get disrupted:

Yup, same for General Motors.
They would have survived a reorganization bankruptcy WITHOUT American tax dollars being wasted first.