So don't forget socialism

[I'm Watermark]

Ill take a free market capitalist society over a bureaucratic socialist one any day.

So would I.

But what you're implying is not socialism. It's a system called "bureaucratic collectivism" that's classified as this: A nation where a non democratic bureaucracy owns the MOP. It's what happened in the Soviet Union, sparking a left opposition. And it's starkly anti-socialist, as in order for a country to be classified as socialist, the MOP must be owned democratically.

 

[evince]

my "stupid" memes must really hit a nerve with you. I guess they have alot of truth to them if they do.

nope they are lies laced with more lies.


I dont much like lies

 

[dixon76710]

So would I.

But what you're implying is not socialism. It's a system called "bureaucratic collectivism" that's classified as this: A nation where a non democratic bureaucracy owns the MOP. It's what happened in the Soviet Union, sparking a left opposition. And it's starkly anti-socialist, as in order for a country to be classified as socialist, the MOP must be owned democratically.

??? No, that would be DEMOCRATIC socialism. ""Democratic" added to distinguish it from regular socialism which is not.

 

[Robo]

2. Hitler was a right wing nationalist. He may have used that word, but only because it was popular in Europe.

SOCIALISM:
a political theory or system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles (Encarta English Dictionary)

So, do the people have a head of government in a socialist nation? If not, who directs the traffic? Who decides what is fair and what isn’t? How does a socialist nation interact with other nations that aren’t socialist if not by “market forces?” If a socialist nation has no government who conducts the referendum elections? What does a socialist nation do if some in the nation are opposed to the socialist system? If socialism was/is so popular in Europe why isn’t there any absolute pie-in-the-sky socialist nations in Europe?

Fact is Goober, socialism is a fraud and an absolute fantasy only viable in the brain-dead minds of fucking political lunatics. Only a Hitler or Stalin or Mao or Castro or that fucking lunatic in North Korea can make a socialist nation work for any extended period of time, to the detriment of the population of said nation.

 

[Robo]

3. Stalin established a kind of capitalism. There are a lot of reasons for it - we can go into that specifically, if you'd like -, but in simple terms, it's because he was a morally deficient leader who didn't listen to the opinions of his peers.

So Stalin was a ”capitalist?” Now that’s funny, I don’t care who ya are!!! Actually Stalin understood the folly of socialism and knew the only way a nation could perpetrate a socialist system was by force and terrorizing the people. Stalin understood that a socialist nation could only last by dictatorship and massive tyrannical governance. Stalin’s mistake was he thought that a socialist economy could compete on the world economic stage with capitalism. He proved beyond any reasonable doubt how fucking wrong he was about that.

 

[Robo]

4. Cuba is a democracy. Mao's China was not. NK is not.

Cuba is a democracy? And you want folks to think you’re sane????

 

[I'm Watermark]

So you choose to ignore the question “Where has socialism ever established a “democracy?” by asking a question irrelevant to the question?

Well RC, unlike you I answer questions. The answer to your question is there has never been an absolute “democracy” as Jefferson noted, a democracy can only work at the lowest of local governmental levels, i. e. a family of adults or at the most a small town. A government by “referendum” is absurd and begs for corruption, fraud, bribery and the instigation of terror and establishing angry mobs.

Capitalism on the other hand is mankind’s oldest and most successful economic system because it is totally in lock step with human nature. Humans are created as individuals not some brain-dead mob of collective zombies.

There's really very little to respond to here, as you just digressed into another human nature rant.

Anyway, the democracy you pointed out is anti-capitalist. In fact, it actually echoes Marxism or Bakunism. Localities are being (and have been) degraded by capitalism due to its tendency to centralize power in the hands of a small number of individuals. When you give a person the ability to control export the work of another, you end up with localities that are subject to the fluctuation of wages and the working conditions set by the employer. Or even better, the jobs just disappear - which has happened a lot lately - as the employer ships off them to another country, leaving heightened unemployment, a degraded tax base, decreased public services, and an increase in misery as the stability of workers' lives disappears.

This is by far against the interests of the individual, is it not? How, may I ask, is a system that strips the individual of pride, expression in the workplace and control over his own life, helping the individual? How is a system where the prerequisite to sustaining life is obeying the command of a master, in the interest of the individual? What does the individual gain by not owning his work, along with his fellows?

 

[I'm Watermark]

I just saw all the other posts. Classic Liberal, choose one and we can make a thread about it.

 

[evince]

they dont understand the real definitions of words.

makes it hard to speak to them like adults

 

[I'm Watermark]

Cuba is a democracy? And you want folks to think you’re sane????

On some levels, but not for the position of president. Unless I got my facts wrong, I believe it's a democracy on the level of what we'd call a national congress.

 

[I'm Watermark]

they dont understand the real definitions of words.

makes it hard to speak to them like adults

Who's they?

 

[FKD19124]

It's not a democracy.

Cuba is a democracy? And you want folks to think you’re sane????

 

[Robo]

5. Socialism has faced a lot of challenges, from overzealous leaders who didn't correctly understand the Marxian process, to capitalisms using military force against revolutions. There have been some success stories, like Venezuela, Spain and Cuba, but most have fallen victim to the aforementioned. And all the bits that make up a standard socialist model have been put in place here and there (usually to prevent socialism), but once you piece them all together, Stalins and Reagans get in the way.

The only reason Venezuela remains a viable nation is because it has lots of ”OIL” and is forced by ”capitalist market forces” to sell it on the world’s ”capitalist market place.” Without their oil they would be just another impoverished nation like Cuba.

If you like socialist Cuba who is the “step child” of Venezuela, being supported by Venezuelan oil, then you should move there if you don’t already live there. If Cuba is so great, why do Cubans escape Cuba to get to America? Why don’t Americans try to escape to Cuba? If Cuba is a socialist democracy, how come they have a government? Isn’t socialism government free? How come we never hear about Cuba’s referendum elections on all Cuban policy?

 

[Robo]

There's really very little to respond to here, as you just digressed into another human nature rant.

In other words, you have no rational argument to present to the “human nature rant,” right? Do you deny that humans are “self-centered” in general? Do you deny that humans “self-indulgent” in general? Do you deny that humans are “self-interested in general?” Do you deny that humans are individually talented, have “individual” degrees of beauty and ugliness, of ambition and laziness, of mental abilities, of charity and of greed and of authoritarianism and wussiness? All of that is human nature Goober and the simplistic reason why socialism is a fraud and a pie-in-the sky fantastic folly. Actual socialism is a laughable horror show.

When you can come up with a single and actual lasting socialist success story of evidence for your fucking insanity, you’re simply a tiresome boring preacher of pure stupidity in my book.

 

[I'm Watermark]

In other words, you have no rational argument to present to the “human nature rant,” right? Do you deny that humans are “self-centered” in general? Do you deny that humans “self-indulgent” in general? Do you deny that humans are “self-interested in general?” Do you deny that humans are individually talented, have “individual” degrees of beauty and ugliness, of ambition and laziness, of mental abilities, of charity and of greed and of authoritarianism and wussiness? All of that is human nature Goober and the simplistic reason why socialism is a fraud and a pie-in-the sky fantastic folly. Actual socialism is a laughable horror show.

When you can come up with a single and actual lasting socialist success story of evidence for your fucking insanity, you’re simply a tiresome boring preacher of pure stupidity in my book.

I'm going to make this short - a few sentences - because you obviously have no intention of debating me. Whiter it be choosing to address almost a dozen topics, and refusing to make the conversation more specific, or just flat out ignoring what I write. So either make this somehow worth my time, or fuck off.

Socialism lost the war. There's no questioning that. Marx laid it out very clearly - the constant threat posed by established industrial capitalisms, not only to their people, but to democratic uprisings - and it's been a topic of endless debate. But socialism has existed very successfully all throughout history, only to be snuffed out by fascisms or capitalisms. So I don't know what it's future will be; one of widespread success, or further oppression. Either way, it's still something we need.

I recommend you do some reading on Latin American socialism (which has been very successful and good for the region) and on the ideological development of pre-Soviet Russia.

 

[Robo]

I'm going to make this short - a few sentences - because you obviously have no intention of debating me. Whiter it be choosing to address almost a dozen topics, and refusing to make the conversation more specific, or just flat out ignoring what I write. So either make this somehow worth my time, or fuck off.

Well comrade I’ve taken on every insane topic you’ve posted. It’s sure as hell not my fault if you don’t like my style or the undeniable truth of my post. Of course you’ll make your response here short and sweet because you have no credible arguments to promote your supposed positive attributes of the pure stupidity of socialism.

 

[DamnYankee]

.

Socialism lost the war. ...

Of course they did. But progressives never quit, so they went underground and are fighting a clandestine war.

 

[Robo]

Socialism lost the war. There's no questioning that. Marx laid it out very clearly - the constant threat posed by established industrial capitalisms, not only to their people, but to democratic uprisings - and it's been a topic of endless debate. But socialism has existed very successfully all throughout history, only to be snuffed out by fascisms or capitalisms. So I don't know what it's future will be; one of widespread success, or further oppression. Either way, it's still something we need.

Every place socialism has been tried Comrade its failed by its own stupidity. Would you not identify North Korea as a “socialist” nation? If not why not? Is North Korea a “capitalist” nation? If so, how so?

In your own words, (devoid of horseshit you read from your communist library), tell us how socialism is in tune with human nature, how it abolishes all need for government and how it is administered without force. Tell us how it overcomes capitalist market forces, supply and demand, the human desire to exceed and attain wealth. Tell us how socialism incentivizes invention and ambition and the positive human condition. I can explain how capitalism does all of that, how does socialism do it?

Oh! That’s right, you don’t answer questions you ignore questions and just complain about your opponent in every discussion, huh?

 

[Robo]

I recommend you do some reading on Latin American socialism (which has been very successful and good for the region) and on the ideological development of pre-Soviet Russia.

Well comrade I suggest you tell us all about Latin-American socialism and its glorious attrobutes and then we can see where that discussion goes.

I recommend that you do some reading about the historical “Great American Experiment” in “Constitutional Republicanism” and the capitalism that has made it the most successful nation on planet earth ever providing the greatest of human condition. That is of course until the fucking socialist infiltrated our universities and government and began the deadly ignorant corrupt demise of the greatest system ever known to mankind.