The last sentence of your statement is illogical. How is it that if the two were interdependent—which they are—every nation would have the same political and economic system?
Because if they were “inseparable” as you claim, you couldn’t separate them. Thus each nation would have the exact same system. The fact that some nations are capitalist and others are socialist indisputably proves that the systems aren’t even remotely tied.
 
Social-ism is about Government.
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Socialism is an economic system, snowflake. Government is exclusively political.

(Words matter, stupid)
I am smart enough to understand a dictionary definition regarding the word, social.

Social-ism is what we are discussing, not your political jargon invented for the Cold War of last millennium.
 
words matter,
Yes they do. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Words matter.
Yes, especially when it is about the security of a free State and not the whole and entire concept of natural rights.
It clearly says “people” and it clearly says “RIGHT”. Words matter, stupid.
It is understood, when it is about the security of a free like it says in the first clause; the People are the Militia; you are either well regulated or unorganized.
 
words matter,
Yes they do. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Words matter.
Yes, especially when it is about the security of a free State and not the whole and entire concept of natural rights.
It clearly says “people” and it clearly says “RIGHT”. Words matter, stupid.
It is understood, when it is about the security of a free like it says in the first clause; the People are the Militia; you are either well regulated or unorganized.

However. I stand alone against all enemies both foreign and domestic. I am a militia of one who carries a deer rifle and I would never shoot a deer because I don't like eating Bambi.
 
words matter,
Yes they do. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Words matter.
Yes, especially when it is about the security of a free State and not the whole and entire concept of natural rights.
It clearly says “people” and it clearly says “RIGHT”. Words matter, stupid.
It is understood, when it is about the security of a free like it says in the first clause; the People are the Militia; you are either well regulated or unorganized.

However. I stand alone against all enemies both foreign and domestic. I am a militia of one who carries a deer rifle and I would never shoot a deer because I don't like eating Bambi.
i prefer to get acquainted with my heavy weapons section. I am sure I can learn how to do something.
 
It is understood, when it is about the security of a free like it says in the first clause; the People are the Militia; you are either well regulated or unorganized.
It is understood that you are illiterate. It is also understood that you desire to disarm and oppress people. Thankfully for the American people, our founders not only made it a right in the United States constitution, but they made it an individual right for the people. It clearly says “people” and it clearly says “right”. Words matter, stupid.
 
The last sentence of your statement is illogical. How is it that if the two were interdependent—which they are—every nation would have the same political and economic system?
Because if they were “inseparable” as you claim, you couldn’t separate them. Thus each nation would have the exact same system. The fact that some nations are capitalist and others are socialist indisputably proves that the systems aren’t even remotely tied.

That doesn't really answer my question, but okay.
 
Social-ism is about Government.
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Socialism is an economic system, snowflake. Government is exclusively political.

(Words matter, stupid)
I am smart enough to understand a dictionary definition regarding the word, social.
But sadly you are too stupid to understand the dictionary definition of the word socialism.
just obsolete political jargon used by the right wing to resort to fallacy; special pleading is a fallacy of composition, in this case.

Social-ism, is the concept.
 
It is understood, when it is about the security of a free like it says in the first clause; the People are the Militia; you are either well regulated or unorganized.
It is understood that you are illiterate. It is also understood that you desire to disarm and oppress people. Thankfully for the American people, our founders not only made it a right in the United States constitution, but they made it an individual right for the people. It clearly says “people” and it clearly says “right”. Words matter, stupid.
read our Second Amendment; the People are the Militia when it is about the security of our free States. Only the unorganized militia whines about gun control.
 
just obsolete political jargon
First he says “words matter”. When I use that truth to bury him, he attempts to make words not matter by crying “obsolete political jargon”.

Sorry snowflake, you can’t have it both ways. You’ve been exposed and humiliated here. It isn’t “obsolete political jargon”. Words matter.
 
read our Second Amendment; the People are the Militia when it is about the security of our free States.
No where in the 2nd Amendment does it state “the people are the militia”. It doesn’t even imply that. It clearly states that arms are a right and it belongs to the people.

Words matter. You lose.
 

Forum List

Back
Top