Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Really? Capitalism causes slavery? There was no such thing as capitalism back in the Neolithic era, Carbine, you dumbass. Once again you make an unsubstantiated argument. Eugenics? Eugenics is a neo-liberal notion! Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist, you know, the founder of Planned Parenthood? It's only natural Progressives would still hearken back to that.
Would you like to argue whether or not the plantation system of the antebellum South, with a large part of its labor done by slaves,
was a capitalist or socialist economy?
Go ahead. Convince me that privately owned plantations, with the property and the means of production, as well as the capital investment, done by private citizens,
was socialism, not capitalism.
No, I would much rather not. It is irrelevant. Stay on topic. Don't move the goalposts. I could care less what economic form they took. You should research history, Carbine. Slavery started in the Neolithic era, not in the Antebellum South. You want to label people who live in the south and pigeonhole them all into one racist redneck, slave loving collective, and then blame capitalism for their so-called behavior.
Knock it off. Your diversion is quite easy to see.
Really? Capitalism causes slavery? There was no such thing as capitalism back in the Neolithic era, Carbine, you dumbass. Once again you make an unsubstantiated argument. Eugenics? Eugenics is a neo-liberal notion! Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist, you know, the founder of Planned Parenthood? It's only natural Progressives would still hearken back to that.
Would you like to argue whether or not the plantation system of the antebellum South, with a large part of its labor done by slaves,
was a capitalist or socialist economy?
Go ahead. Convince me that privately owned plantations, with the property and the means of production, as well as the capital investment, done by private citizens,
was socialism, not capitalism.
No, I would much rather not. It is irrelevant. Stay on topic. Don't move the goalposts. I could care less what economic form they took. You should research history, Carbine. Slavery started in the Neolithic era, not in the Antebellum South. You want to label people who live in the south and pigeonhole them all into one racist redneck, slave loving collective, and then blame capitalism for their so-called behavior.
Knock it off. Your diversion is quite easy to see.
To get right to the point, there are two truths that a study of history makes eminently clear:
1) Progressivism, Liberalism, socialism, communism...whatever appellation is applied...all are permutations based on the same ideas.
2) Viewing the collective as a higher value than the individual, the life of any under their purview become inconsequential.
Consider this history of socialist paradises Sweden and Norway....a cautionary tale for Obama voters.
1. "Sweden is the poster state for those who believe in the power of the government to solve all problems. Frequently referred to as a "benevolent" socialist or social democratic state, to distinguish it from the run-of-the-mill socialist butcher shop, such as Cuba, China, North Korea, the USSR, and most of Africa, Latin and Central America, and Asia, Sweden is the Promised Land of the Left. Where the USSR was a departure from the genius of Karl Marx, Sweden shows the potential.
2.... the Swedes have not always acted benevolently, as reported on page A1 of the August 29, 1997,Washington Post,
From 1934 to 1974, 62,000 Swedes were sterilized as part of a national program grounded in the science of racial biology and carried out by officials who believed they were helping to build a progressive, enlightened welfare state...In some cases, couples judged to be inferior parents were sterilized, as were their children when they became teenagers.
a. ... "there was nothing secret about the sterilization program. It was carried out in the light of public debate at a time when Swedes believed they were creating a society that would be the envy of the world." The Swedish Institute for Racial Biology, founded in 1922, was the first national institute of the kind. The Swedes were also the first to sterilize the mentally ill, beginning in 1934.
b. ...the ruling party at the time the Social Democrats "accepted the policy as an essential part of their overall philosophy." This claims is supported by the fact that, as noted above, the Social Democrats came to power in Sweden in 1932. In other words, they waited a mere two years before embarking on a program of eugenics.
c. ... that "90 per cent of [those sterilizied] were women," and that "the practice, which predated and outlived Nazi Germany, started as an attempt to weed out perceived genetic weaknesses, mental or physical defectsand ended as a method of social control." According to Professor Gunnar Broberg, "Young girls were told they would be set free from [mental] homes and prisons if we are allowed to make you calmer.'"
d. .... supporters of the sterilization program were Gunnar and Alva Myrdal, according to a 1991 Swedish radio documentary produced by Bosse Lindquist. Gunnar Myrdal was a socialist economist who shared the 1974 Nobel Prize for Economics with Friedrich Hayek. Gunnar Myrdal has also been praised as a "pioneer" in race relations.
3. Unfortunately, sterilizations are just the tip of the iceberg. As the Irish Times and Agence-France Presse reported on April 7, 1998, a Swedish Television documentary reveals that Sweden lobotomized perhaps 4500 "undesirables," in some cases without the consent of their families:
Some 500 lobotomies were conducted on patients who were not from mental hospitals...including a seven-year-old boy in Umeaa in northern Sweden in 1949. Diagnosed as "mentally retarded, hyperactive", he died during surgery.
4. Sweden, however, is not alone in hiding its past. As the Irish Times also reports,
Since the Swedish revelations, other apparently "clean" countries have found similar skeletons in their cupboards. Both Norway and Denmark had similar policies. And this week a Swiss history professor, Hans Ulrich Jost, said Swiss doctors sterilised mentally-handicapped patients (again most of them women) against their will under a law passed in 1928.
"Even Hitler requested a copy of the law from the canton and from the government in Berne as a basis for Nazi Germany's own racist laws."
5. Europe and the rest of the world indeed ought to face facts and admit their hypocrisy where eugenics and human rights are concerned. Europe and the rest of the world should also give up their search for a magical socialist solution to the material conditions of human existence."
Sweden and the Myth of Benevolent Socialism
Where does the current socialist regime in Washington fit into this?
6. Hand in glove:
" Signs of ObamaCare's failings mount daily, including soaring insurance costs, looming provider shortages and inadequate insurance exchanges. Yet the law's most disturbing feature may be the Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB, sometimes called a "death panel," threatens both the Medicare program and the Constitution's separation of powers....
For a vivid illustration of the extent to which life-and-death medical decisions have already been usurped by government bureaucrats, consider the recent refusal by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to waive the rules barring access by 10-year old Sarah Murnaghan to the adult lung-transplant list." David Rivkin and Elizabeth Foley: An ObamaCare Board Answerable to No One - WSJ.com
How long will the Obama supporters rely on vincible ignorance???
Yeah, sounds like they're out to get you. You should run. Fast.
Based on how deftly you rebutted the OP, sounds like you're a dim-wit.
Keep up the bad work.
Yeah, sounds like they're out to get you. You should run. Fast.
Based on how deftly you rebutted the OP, sounds like you're a dim-wit.
Keep up the bad work.
Your daily "they're out to get me" manifesto holds no interest.
Would you like to argue whether or not the plantation system of the antebellum South, with a large part of its labor done by slaves,
was a capitalist or socialist economy?
Go ahead. Convince me that privately owned plantations, with the property and the means of production, as well as the capital investment, done by private citizens,
was socialism, not capitalism.
No, I would much rather not. It is irrelevant. Stay on topic. Don't move the goalposts. I could care less what economic form they took. You should research history, Carbine. Slavery started in the Neolithic era, not in the Antebellum South. You want to label people who live in the south and pigeonhole them all into one racist redneck, slave loving collective, and then blame capitalism for their so-called behavior.
Knock it off. Your diversion is quite easy to see.
Where in Sweden is government sanctioned forced sterilization being performed today?
Would you like to argue whether or not the plantation system of the antebellum South, with a large part of its labor done by slaves,
was a capitalist or socialist economy?
Go ahead. Convince me that privately owned plantations, with the property and the means of production, as well as the capital investment, done by private citizens,
was socialism, not capitalism.
No, I would much rather not. It is irrelevant. Stay on topic. Don't move the goalposts. I could care less what economic form they took. You should research history, Carbine. Slavery started in the Neolithic era, not in the Antebellum South. You want to label people who live in the south and pigeonhole them all into one racist redneck, slave loving collective, and then blame capitalism for their so-called behavior.
Knock it off. Your diversion is quite easy to see.
Someone tries to associate eugenics with socialism and it's off-topic to point out that the most salient example of eugenics ever practiced in the U.S. was selective slave breeding in the South,
with a capitalist motive?
That's called a refutation of a claim.
Yeah, sounds like they're out to get you. You should run. Fast.
Based on how deftly you rebutted the OP, sounds like you're a dim-wit.
Keep up the bad work.
Your daily "they're out to get me" manifesto holds no interest.
Healthcare minus all socialism would be a system where if you could afford it, you'd get it,
and if you couldn't afford it, you'd go without.
The richer you were, all else being equal, the healthier you'd be. The poorer you were, the less healthy you'd be.
That would amount to Mother Nature's eugenics, aka, survival of the fittest with some law of the jungle thrown in.
Based on how deftly you rebutted the OP, sounds like you're a dim-wit.
Keep up the bad work.
Your daily "they're out to get me" manifesto holds no interest.
Negged for trolling.
If socialism is so awful, one would think that those who deem it so could simply make rational, reasoned, effective arguments against socialism itself,
instead of having to resort to digging up crazy relics of the past and trying to concoct some laughable guilt by association argument.
Of course that's easier than trying to discredit providing public schooling or healthcare to those who can't afford it.
No fair bringing up historical examples! This is the dawning of the age of Aquarius...
Nobody said history should be off the table, but it ought to be relevant history.
For example,
let's talk about slavery, a function of CAPITALISM, not socialism.
And then let's talk about Slave Breeding in the old South, a prime example of Eugenics,
and one done for the sake of CAPITALISM, not socialism.
Fair enough?
When all else fails, play the Race Card: Slavery existed throughout the world since Biblical times, yet you blame it on Capitalism. Brilliant.
If you would like to convince us that the plantation system agribusiness of the antebellum South was not capitalism,
go ahead. Let's hear it.
In a market based economy that conservatives might approve of,
wouldn't donor organs simply go to the highest bidder? Shouldn't the less well off simply resign themselves to accepting that one of the consequences of their economic circumstance is that they can't expect to benefit from the costly process of organ transplant if they can't afford to win the auction?
Gee, I'm shocked no one wants to talk about the selective breeding of human slaves as a for-profit capitalist business practice...
...in the old states rights conservative American South...
lol, I thought you people loved to talk about eugenics!!
Eugenics as a symbol of the American entreprenurial spirit!!
Eugenics as a symbol of free market capitalism unfettered by the onerous ball and chain of government induced social welfare and the greater good.
lolol.
Based on how deftly you rebutted the OP, sounds like you're a dim-wit.
Keep up the bad work.
Your daily "they're out to get me" manifesto holds no interest.
Negged for trolling.
Yes, it was very benevolent to sterilize those people without their consent and not charge them for it.Healthcare minus all socialism would be a system where if you could afford it, you'd get it,
and if you couldn't afford it, you'd go without.
The richer you were, all else being equal, the healthier you'd be. The poorer you were, the less healthy you'd be.
That would amount to Mother Nature's eugenics, aka, survival of the fittest with some law of the jungle thrown in.
Your daily "they're out to get me" manifesto holds no interest.
Negged for trolling.
not to worry, i gave him a pos rep.
This thread is a mess...
In a market based economy that conservatives might approve of,
wouldn't donor organs simply go to the highest bidder? Shouldn't the less well off simply resign themselves to accepting that one of the consequences of their economic circumstance is that they can't expect to benefit from the costly process of organ transplant if they can't afford to win the auction?
Yeah. How long ago did that happen? Sweden's forced sterilizations continued until 1974. PP's eugenics program against blacks is happening today.Gee, I'm shocked no one wants to talk about the selective breeding of human slaves as a for-profit capitalist business practice...
...in the old states rights conservative American South...
lol, I thought you people loved to talk about eugenics!!
Eugenics as a symbol of the American entreprenurial spirit!!
Eugenics as a symbol of free market capitalism unfettered by the onerous ball and chain of government induced social welfare and the greater good.
lolol.
Most salient?Would you like to argue whether or not the plantation system of the antebellum South, with a large part of its labor done by slaves,
was a capitalist or socialist economy?
Go ahead. Convince me that privately owned plantations, with the property and the means of production, as well as the capital investment, done by private citizens,
was socialism, not capitalism.
No, I would much rather not. It is irrelevant. Stay on topic. Don't move the goalposts. I could care less what economic form they took. You should research history, Carbine. Slavery started in the Neolithic era, not in the Antebellum South. You want to label people who live in the south and pigeonhole them all into one racist redneck, slave loving collective, and then blame capitalism for their so-called behavior.
Knock it off. Your diversion is quite easy to see.
Someone tries to associate eugenics with socialism and it's off-topic to point out that the most salient example of eugenics ever practiced in the U.S. was selective slave breeding in the South,
with a capitalist motive?
That's called a refutation of a claim.
Most salient?No, I would much rather not. It is irrelevant. Stay on topic. Don't move the goalposts. I could care less what economic form they took. You should research history, Carbine. Slavery started in the Neolithic era, not in the Antebellum South. You want to label people who live in the south and pigeonhole them all into one racist redneck, slave loving collective, and then blame capitalism for their so-called behavior.
Knock it off. Your diversion is quite easy to see.
Someone tries to associate eugenics with socialism and it's off-topic to point out that the most salient example of eugenics ever practiced in the U.S. was selective slave breeding in the South,
with a capitalist motive?
That's called a refutation of a claim.
In your fevered imagination.
There were almost 4 million slaves by 1860. Not all of those were selectively bred, of course. Some were imported.
Since 1973, 13 million black babies were aborted.
Looks like your refutation is refuted, Skippy.
Given your support abortion on demand, your weeping for black slaves is less than convincing.
