When has socialism ever worked?

Yes really.
That is why all countries used to have capitalists monarchies, and they were all over thrown once we had firearms, the democratic equalizer.
What we replace the capitalist monarchies with is up to us, but if we do not replace them with socialist republics, the we are not getting anywhere.

All countries? Are you absolutely certain about that?
Be very careful with your answer because I know different.
 
Capitalism collapsed in 1929.
And 2008. And it took the government to bailout the failure of the private sector each time. The private sector can only fail. Government regulation is the only reason it doesn't fail more often.

The next time it happens. No bailout for any bank or business. Total collapse. All wealth confiscated through civil forfeiture laws for all banks, and contributing financial institutions, including the private personal wealth of the CEO's and shareholders, and all debts on all loans forgiven held by anyone with credit card, auto, home, or student loans, and all medical debts.

This will shut the socialist loud mouths up for a long time to come.
 
Venezuela is one of the least socialist countries in the world, and is the remnants of Spanish imperialism and colonialism.
The US also created a reactionary military elite in Venezuela.

The oil in Venezuela is not light sweet, but thick tar sands that is very hard to extract.
The US embargoes Venezuela, so they are having trouble getting broken equipment fixed.
Yeah - because all of that oil they have apparently doesn't pay the bills to fix shit when it's needed to drive corruption.

WTFU.
 
Epic ignorance. Dangerous ignorance. You're fired from this thread. Democide. Ever hear of it? Every form of human government since time immemorial is guilty of committing it; for religion, for ideology—but most of all to establish complete control over the populace.
Epic is an understatement. I don't even have a word for that level of ignorance.
 
Socialism has never worked because it was never done the right way. Ammarite?
/sarc

I'll just drop this here:

 
Last edited:
To be communist or socialist, where there is shared or communal property or resources, you absolutely do have to have a democratic republic with elected representation.

Any country that is run by a wealthy elite, is automatically NOT socialist or communist, but pretty much has to be a capitalist dictatorship.
All pure capitalist countries have to always be dictatorships, and all socialist or communist countries have to be democratic republics.
where do democracies fall in?
 
They have never supported socialism as a party platform. You are a liar.

The two instances you quoted are now two extremely powerful countries but you think socialism is s failure????

Do you ever think about things you say?
Really? You admire "powerful countries" like China and Russia?
Powerful governments that took away personal freedoms of their citizens.
Be careful what you say over there, Colon.
 
Democrats have become ardent supporters of socialism...just look at the collapse of USSR in 1989, and China? Is THAT a political model we want?

What "socialism" do you mean?

Socialism as in the means of production in the hands of the government, or socialism like the NHS in the UK?
 
"Socialism is an economic and political system where workers own the general means of production (i. e. farms, factories, tools, and raw materials.) ... This is different from capitalism, where the means of production are privately owned by capital holders."

Nothing about schools and cops in there. :cuckoo:

In the past, schools used to be all private, and you hired private Pinkerton Security guards if you wanted police.
So the public schools and cops took over and made public, what previously have been private means of production.
The "means of production" is anything you can charge money for.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: cnm
Not one mention of public services, which existed LONG before anyone ever came up with the idiotic idea of socialism.

Socialism predates capitalism or currency.
When the primitive hunter/gatherer tribes sat down for dinner, they shared what ever any hunter was able to come up with.
That is socialism.
Socialism is the historic norm, and capitalism did not get invented until long after the switch to sedentary agriculture.
 
Is it Communism or Socialism?

If we are debating Communism it will fail all the time because of greed, envy and sloth…

Socialism already exists in the U.S. and has since FDR…

Maybe.
It is not exactly clear what communism is, since it is normally only done on very small scale, like families and tribes.
 
Really? You admire "powerful countries" like China and Russia?
Powerful governments that took away personal freedoms of their citizens.
Be careful what you say over there, Colon.

Taking away personal freedoms is why they can't be socialist or communist.
 
Yeah - because all of that oil they have apparently doesn't pay the bills to fix shit when it's needed to drive corruption.

WTFU.

But electing one socialist president can not make a country with a powerful ruling elite from historic colonial beginnings, to be even remotely socialist.
 
Socialism has never worked because it was never done the right way. Ammarite?
/sarc

I'll just drop this here:



Socialism has never failed.
For example, all families are socialist, and families would certainly not be better if they were capitalist and the parents charged children room and board for a profit motive.
 
Socialism has never failed.
For example, all families are socialist, and families would certainly not be better if they were capitalist and the parents charged children room and board for a profit motive.
Forcing societies to act like families is a disaster and you know it. There is no way to force a connection as Socialism attempts to do.

Parents provide for their children because they are their children. That motherfucker down the street is not my child nor is he related to me in anyway. I don't want to give him shit. He is a competitor, not a family member.

Families work. Socialism does not.
 
They are examples of communism they are not examples of capitalism in any form

No, communism is where people voluntarily pool resources so that they can collectively create communal means of production they can cooperatively share.
That amount of mutual possession can't possibly be considered without a democratic representation and protection of individual rights.
And what you have in Russia and China were Stalinism, where the main goal was accumulation of wealth for the elite.
That is exactly capitalism, but since it was done by abusing the government coercion, it was state captialism.
Was wealth shared communally?
No.
So then it can't be communism.
 
Forcing societies to act like families is a disaster and you know it. There is no way to force a connection as Socialism attempts to do.

Parents provide for their children because they are their children. That motherfucker down the street is not my child nor is he related to me in anyway. I don't want to give him shit. He is a competitor, not a family member.

Families work. Socialism does not.

Personally I think communism is possible, but it likely would have to be very decentralized.
But it does not matter.
The world is extremely hostile and competitive, so then the innovations of capitalism likely seems necessary.


Humans normally always lived in communal groups like large extended families.
Isolated nuclear families is not normal, but a way of life capitalists sold to make more profits off us.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top