Chavez On Private Schools: Teach Socialism or Face Takeover

[FUCK THE POLICE]

My cat's a Keynesian

Can't talk him out of it, no matter what. He ain't even a new keynesian. All old school.

What should I do ?

 

[uscitizen]

Let LadyT handle the Cat problem WM. She is good at it.

 

[Timshel]

My cat's a Keynesian

Can't talk him out of it, no matter what. He ain't even a new keynesian. All old school.

What should I do ?

My roommate's cat is a Maoist. Won't stfu about Mao. I get up in the night to take a pee, and it's "Mao Mao Mao."

 

[Cypress]

I was talking about OUR history and that I would work against any such change. Not theirs. And I have as much right to work within the system to effect the change I want to see as you do. I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Don't attempt to silence me, I have a right to speak out against such systems of government invading my system.

" I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation."


Question Damo: I'd like to find out what you mean by this.

Socialism by definition, is the central government ownership and control of manufacturing, production, and distribution. I don't think I've ever heard more than a handful of american's in my entire life advocate for that - i.e., advocate for government ownership and production of oil, gas, chemicals, automobiles, shoes, hockey pucks, computer software, etc.

Is what you really mean is that you want to fight to keep american's social safety net and public social welfare services from being more generous? Or indeed, that you want to fight to curtail them? Is what you really want to fight against is a capitalist social welfare state, like the Swedish or Dutch-model?


thanks.

 

[Damocles]

I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Surely there are better uses of your time. This nation is never going to be a socialist nation, whatever that really means. The dictionary definition means centralized government control over manufacturing, production, and distribution. Calm down my man. That ain't going to happen except in the fevered imagination of Lyndon Larouche types.

A better use of your time would be to fight to end bush's war, to restore the constitutional freedoms we've lost, to fight poverty, etc.

Learning from history is not a mistake. And I'm reasonably sure that people in Germany believed that they never would have a Nationalist Socialist government that would control nearly every aspect of their lives and create Ghettos. But it happened.

Learning how things happen is important. Working against socialization of the government a good thing.

Seriously I'm not 'excited' about that. Just more ticked that he decided I have no right to speak out about the place I live while learning and discussing another place. I was just using his own "tone" against him.

You don't think he sounded angry with the "Who the F*CK are you?!" stuff?

Come on, you know me better than this.

 

[Damocles]

" I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation."


Question Damo: I'd like to find out what you mean by this.

Socialism by definition, is the central government ownership and control of manufacturing, production, and distribution. I don't think I've ever heard more than a handful of american's in my entire life advocate for that - i.e., advocate for government ownership and production of oil, gas, chemicals, automobiles, shoes, hockey pucks, computer software, etc.

Is what you really mean is that you want to fight to keep american's social safety net and public social welfare services from being more generous? Or indeed, that you want to fight to curtail them? Is what you really want to fight against is a capitalist social welfare state, like the Swedish or Dutch-model?


thanks.

My original point in the thread was that we can learn from Venezuela, and see signs that point to the wrong direction from our government. If they vote their freedom away to a level where it becomes illegal to teach economics other than socialism, so be it for them. But I won't sit idly by and watch it happen here, I can learn how this guy did it and avoid falling for the same game.

Basically I am saying that discussion of what happens elsewhere has nothing to do with telling them how to live, but of learning what happened. If it is good you may want to emulate it, if it is bad you may want to avoid it, either way watching what happens and talking about it is not a bad thing.

 

[Damocles]

He is doing that, since the trend towards centralization of power is THE cause of two and the biggest factor in the third.

This ^^^

 

[Cypress]

Learning from history is not a mistake. And I'm reasonably sure that people in Germany believed that they never would have a Nationalist Socialist government that would control nearly every aspect of their lives and create Ghettos. But it happened.

Learning how things happen is important. Working against socialization of the government a good thing.

Seriously I'm not 'excited' about that. Just more ticked that he decided I have no right to speak out about the place I live while learning and discussing another place. I was just using his own "tone" against him.

You don't think he sounded angry with the "Who the F*CK are you?!" stuff?

Come on, you know me better than this.

Oh, yeah, I don't like cursing for no good reason, even though I'm occasionally guilty of it. I didn't read the whole thread, but I doubt you deserved to get cursed out.

I'm just saying that if we go by the actual dictionary definition of "socialism", that's not what you're fighting against in this country. I don't know hardly any real socialists.

My impression of you, is that you're figting against more generous public social programs. Education and healthcare, primarily. I really don't think hardly anyone in america has advocated a socialist economy, with governement-owned manufacturing, production and distribution.

 

[Damocles]

Oh, yeah, I don't like cursing for no good reason, even though I'm occasionally guilty of it. I didn't read the whole thread, but I doubt you deserved to get cursed out.

I'm just saying that if we go by the actual dictionary definition of "socialism", that's not what you're fighting against in this country. I don't know hardly any real socialists.

My impression of you, is that you're figting against more generous public social programs. Education and healthcare, primarily. I really don't think hardly anyone in america has advocated a socialist economy, with governement-owned manufacturing, production and distribution.

More against the centralizing of the programs. The measure of compassion is not how much we give in social programs from the Federal side of government.

 

[Cypress]

More against the centralizing of the programs. The measure of compassion is not how much we give in social programs from the Federal side of government.

Okay, then you're not really talking about socialism, let alone fighting against it. You're talking about something else.

 

[Damocles]

Okay, then you're not really talking about socialism, let alone fighting against it. You're talking about something else.

No, I would fight socialism if it tried to get its nasty head in here. Just as I would fascism.

Dude tried to tell me I had no right to suggest that I would in my own nation. I used his tone back. Pretty much that is all.

 

[Cypress]

No, I would fight socialism if it tried to get its nasty head in here. Just as I would fascism.

Dude tried to tell me I had no right to suggest that I would in my own nation. I used his tone back. Pretty much that is all.

Its cool. It just a little pet peeve of mine when republicans call universal health care "socialism". Its not. Not by the dictionary definition. And even if universal health care was "socialism", then there are hardly any capitalist countries on the planet. All the developed asian and european countries are socialist, which would come as a suprise to Nokkia, Royal Dutch Shell, and Mercedes Benz.

ps: there's rarely a reason to curse at you; you're mellow

 

[Damocles]

Its cool. It just a little pet peeve of mine when republicans call universal health care "socialism". Its not. Not by the dictionary definition. And even if universal health care was "socialism", then there are hardly any capitalist countries on the planet. All the developed asian and european countries are socialist, which would come as a suprise to Nokkia, Royal Dutch Shell, and Mercedes Benz.

ps: there's rarely a reason to curse at you; you're mellow

It can be socialistic. If you make private healtch care illegal (Canada) and all healthcare employees government employees it is certainly socialistic.

 

[blackascoal]

I was talking about OUR history and that I would work against any such change. Not theirs. And I have as much right to work within the system to effect the change I want to see as you do. I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Don't attempt to silence me, I have a right to speak out against such systems of government invading my system.

I don't have the SLIGHTEST desire to silence you .. never have. And, I support your right to speak out against anything you choose, but Chavez isn't trying to do one damn thing to your system. He's talking about his own people and country.

I, on the other hand, clearly see the giant gaping hole in the concept of a capitialist democracy .. it's called money .. and MONEY rules your government brother, not the will of the people.

 

[TheDanold]

I don't have the SLIGHTEST desire to silence you .. never have. And, I support your right to speak out against anything you choose, but Chavez isn't trying to do one damn thing to your system. He's talking about his own people and country.

I, on the other hand, clearly see the giant gaping hole in the concept of a capitialist democracy .. it's called money .. and MONEY rules your government brother, not the will of the people.

Money only comes into play when companies have something to gain via government (ie: setting up regulations to favor them or punish competitors).
Make a smaller government like in the past that does a lot less and you instantly have less money involved - just as we once had less money involved.

 

[Cypress]

It can be socialistic. If you make private healtch care illegal (Canada) and all healthcare employees government employees it is certainly socialistic.

I'm not sure socialistic is even a word. But, even if it is, and if its meant to imply a "socialist" economy, its jingoism at best. Sloganeering. Because virutally very advanced capitalist country has publically funded universal healthcare. I don't think it makes them either socialist, or socialistic. I think it means they have a generous - indeed neccessary - public social service.

 

[Epicurus]

I'm not sure socialistic is even a word. But, even if it is, and if its meant to imply a "socialist" economy, its jingoism at best. Sloganeering. Because virutally very advanced capitalist country has publically funded universal healthcare. I don't think it makes them either socialist, or socialistic. I think it means they have a generous - indeed neccessary - public social service.

One could argue that Social Security is a form of socialism. I don't think you can automatically protect a program from allegations of socialism just by calling it a "public safety net".

 

[Damocles]

I don't have the SLIGHTEST desire to silence you .. never have. And, I support your right to speak out against anything you choose, but Chavez isn't trying to do one damn thing to your system. He's talking about his own people and country.

I, on the other hand, clearly see the giant gaping hole in the concept of a capitialist democracy .. it's called money .. and MONEY rules your government brother, not the will of the people.

I said we can learn from what he has done and watch for the signs of it here. I said nothing about changing anything in his nation.

Learning from what is done elsehwere whether you think it is good or bad only can happen if you discuss and pay attention to what is done elsewhere.

Everybody seems ready to dismiss any discussion regardless of what form it takes if it is about Venezuela. I say that is a mistake.

 

[Cypress]

One could argue that Social Security is a form of socialism. I don't think you can automatically protect a program from allegations of socialism just by calling it a "public safety net".

The word "public pensions" even appears in our constitution. I doubt the people who wrote the constitution and its amendments, considered public pensions to be akin to Karl Marx.

Socialism is an economic system. Pertaining to manufacturing, production, and distribution. It is not a reference to public parks, public pensions, or public healthcare. Those are social services.

 

[Damocles]

I'm not sure socialistic is even a word. But, even if it is, and if its meant to imply a "socialist" economy, its jingoism at best. Sloganeering. Because virutally very advanced capitalist country has publically funded universal healthcare. I don't think it makes them either socialist, or socialistic. I think it means they have a generous - indeed neccessary - public social service.

Not all of them take the form where any private healthcare is illegal, and those that do are the bottom of the pile of that group.