Big Problem For The Right: 'Socialism' Is No Longer A Bad Word. You Must Now Explain

Hello iolo,

iolo said:
Capitalism can't work without what the Americans call 'socialism'; for a fair time the US has been able to fool the mugs by looting the world, but even so its weird mid-Nineteenth-Century Manchester Liberalism still left a high proportion of the population very obviously worse off than anyone in most modern countries. What's obvious to everyone else will eventually get through to your masters, just wait and see!
Click to expand...

They already know. They are just trying to stave it off as long as possible. They gonna milk that cow till it croaks!
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Howard the Duck,



No, fascism is far worse.

Capitalism is just as bad as socialism.
Click to expand...

Fascism and socialism both lead to political prisoners and tyranny. Capitalism is as good or bad as your opinion of America and liberty happen to be. Attacking it just shows that you have abandoned liberalism.
 
Hello Howard the Duck,

Howard the Duck said:
Fascism and socialism both lead to political prisoners and tyranny. Capitalism is as good or bad as your opinion of America and liberty happen to be. Attacking it just shows that you have abandoned liberalism.
Click to expand...

I agree that fascism leads to tyranny.

I also believe that tyranny can happen under both capitalism and socialism.

But our differences partly stem from the fact that we have differing definitions for socialism.

I think Social Security is socialism. You don't, do you?
 
StoneByStone said:
No, DC is trying to get rid of Maduro after they hit Venezuela with sanctions. Just another in a long list of Latin American countries that America has fucked up.
Click to expand...

The sanctions followed the tyranny and economic fallout. Should we just sit and watch another socialist regime behave like another socialist regime toward its people?
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Howard the Duck,



I agree that fascism leads to tyranny.

I also believe that tyranny can happen under both capitalism and socialism.

But our differences partly stem from the fact that we have differing definitions for socialism.

I think Social Security is socialism. You don't, do you?
Click to expand...

1) You can't have elements of socialism within a liberal order. You can have illiberal elements, such as progressive policy, just as you can see the numerous instances of corporatism that plague America, even though we are not a fascist state, either.

2) You can still invest into numerous types of retirement plans, such as IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401k, mutual funds, trusts, etc. The government did not go and take over/ban the private financial retirement planning sector when it established social security.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Howard the Duck,



I agree that fascism leads to tyranny.

I also believe that tyranny can happen under both capitalism and socialism.

But our differences partly stem from the fact that we have differing definitions for socialism.

I think Social Security is socialism. You don't, do you?
Click to expand...

Tyranny cannot occur under capitalism, because capitalism is market liberalism. Capitalism can lead to corporatism, which can lead to the collapse of market liberalism, and give rise to a fascist state. This would be properly termed "creeping fascism," the way "creeping socialism" is the slow process of progressivism undermining and collapsing the liberal order.

In the same manner, political liberalism can become undermined through the democratic process, when it undermines civil liberties and constitutional protections. This is how a republic can be supplanted by an empire. Ultimately, every facet of liberalism can be undermined by an illiberal mechanism, which can lead to a collapse of the liberal order.
 
Hello Howard the Duck,

Howard the Duck said:
1) You can't have elements of socialism within a liberal order. You can have illiberal elements, such as progressive policy, just as you can see the numerous instances of corporatism that plague America, even though we are not a fascist state, either.

2) You can still invest into numerous types of retirement plans, such as IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401k, mutual funds, trusts, etc. The government did not go and take over/ban the private financial retirement planning sector when it established social security.
Click to expand...

It's like we are speaking different languages. I don't think progessivism is illiberal.
 
Howdy Howard,

Howard the Duck said:
Tyranny cannot occur under capitalism, because capitalism is market liberalism. Capitalism can lead to corporatism, which can lead to the collapse of market liberalism, and give rise to a fascist state.
Click to expand...

How can corporatism be prevented? They are so powerful already. More powerful than nations.

Howard the Duck said:
This would be properly termed "creeping fascism," the way "creeping socialism" is the slow process of progressivism undermining and collapsing the liberal order.
Click to expand...

Your uncommon definitions for liberalism make it hard to follow. You're speaking a different language. And I don't think you are going to get everybody else to speak it.

Howard the Duck said:
In the same manner, political liberalism can become undermined through the democratic process, when it undermines civil liberties and constitutional protections. This is how a republic can be supplanted by an empire. Ultimately, every facet of liberalism can be undermined by an illiberal mechanism, which can lead to a collapse of the liberal order.
Click to expand...

We must have laws. Without laws and regulations unscrupulous people will destroy the free market. Therefore, we must have government and we must appreciate it.

Those who hate government hate law and order.
 
PoliTalker said:
Howdy Howard,



How can corporatism be prevented? They are so powerful already. More powerful than nations.



Your uncommon definitions for liberalism make it hard to follow. You're speaking a different language. And I don't think you are going to get everybody else to speak it.



We must have laws. Without laws and regulations unscrupulous people will destroy the free market. Therefore, we must have government and we must appreciate it.

Those who hate government hate law and order.
Click to expand...

Corporations are not close to wielding the power of nations. Progressivism is illiberal because it seeks, in all facets of society/law/government to undermine the liberal order (like using US courts to undermine the Constitution) and to supplant the principles of liberalism with progressivism. Left unchecked, it will ultimately lead a Western liberal democracy to collapse outright or to transition into an illiberal form of government and order.

Right now we see the progressive left's contempt for law and order, from incidents like Ferguson to municipal governments having problems maintaining their police forces (like the present situation in Seattle not being able to recruit officers) to the situation with our court system.
 
Hello Howard the Duck,

Howard the Duck said:
Corporations are not close to wielding the power of nations.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Today's mega corporations are currently more powerful than all but the largest nations. And their new trade agreements actually hold even large nations responsible for loss of hoped-for profits to the extent that corporations can hold 'trials' in which they find nations guilty for such transgressions as making laws they don't like and then fining the 'guilty' nations. If a nation decides to give labor more power, it could be forced to pay mega-corporations which have been 'harmed.'

Howard the Duck said:
Progressivism is illiberal because it seeks, in all facets of society/law/government to undermine the liberal order (like using US courts to undermine the Constitution) and to supplant the principles of liberalism with progressivism.
Click to expand...

What some call 'undermining the Constitution,' others believe is following their interpretation.

Howard the Duck said:
Left unchecked, it will ultimately lead a Western liberal democracy to collapse outright or to transition into an illiberal form of government and order.
Click to expand...

Such as in France?

Howard the Duck said:
Right now we see the progressive left's contempt for law and order, from incidents like Ferguson to municipal governments having problems maintaining their police forces (like the present situation in Seattle not being able to recruit officers) to the situation with our court system.
Click to expand...

Blatant stereotyping here. Just because some on the left have opposed some law organizations does not mean the 'the left' has 'contempt for law and order.' Hello. The same reasoning could be applied to the right. Ted Bundy. Waco. Trump's many lawsuits for profit against small contractors who only wanted to get properly paid for their work. None of that means 'The Left' has contempt for law and order any more than 'The Right' does.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Howard the Duck,



I disagree. Today's mega corporations are currently more powerful than all but the largest nations. And their new trade agreements actually hold even large nations responsible for loss of hoped-for profits to the extent that corporations can hold 'trials' in which they find nations guilty for such transgressions as making laws they don't like and then fining the 'guilty' nations. If a nation decides to give labor more power, it could be forced to pay mega-corporations which have been 'harmed.'



What some call 'undermining the Constitution,' others believe is following their interpretation.



Such as in France?



Blatant stereotyping here. Just because some on the left have opposed some law organizations does not mean the 'the left' has 'contempt for law and order.' Hello. The same reasoning could be applied to the right. Ted Bundy. Waco. Trump's many lawsuits for profit against small contractors who only wanted to get properly paid for their work. None of that means 'The Left' has contempt for law and order any more than 'The Right' does.
Click to expand...

Do you think a corporation could defeat a nation in battle?

Also, no one believes that undermining the Constitution with dishonest and corrupt rulings is "interpretation." It's power politics, and it's not really a mystery to anyone. Also, the efforts, such as those I cited, are becoming more common and much more organized. The supporters of ordered liberty among the left are becoming the true outliers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top