Liberals hate seeing things like this

[CFM]

Social Democratic Republic, it works very well. We have highways, police, fire and safety, safe food and drugs, security in our old age and safety nets if we lose our jobs and have children. We have public education and a military to protect our country. I think it works well.

If those things were socialist, you might make sense. Because you want to call them that doesn't make it so.

As for security in old age and if we lose our jobs, there are far better ways to do that an be an honorable individual providing for yourself that to be the beggar you plan to be in those situations. It's called planning ahead. It's clear what your plan is, leech.

 

[CFM]

Sure, I'm all for states' rights. However, more and more Americans are getting on board with universal health care. Eventually Texans will want it too. Hopefully the state government will have it.

Not for nothing, America has moved to the Left on most issues. Today many things we take for granted started out as far left ideas. So I doubt the move towards universal health care is going to stop.

Anyone supporting universal healthcare is telling me they either can't or don't want to do for themselves.

 

[CFM]

Well what would you call the kind of "Socialism" that most Americans want? There are very few Americans, and no mainstream politicians, who want Marxism. Most of us just want what Fox calls Socialism.

Are you saying socialism is different because democratic is put in front of it?

Are you saying that if there are 5 people, 3 of which refuse to do for themselves and 2 that are self sufficient, that the 3 leeches voting to have the 2 successful people fund their wants is different than if an authoritarian government made a dictatorial decision?

 

[CFM]

Depends. If you mean Marxist Socialism, I totally agree. If you mean Fox News Socialism, that actually works very well in Europe, as evident by the high living standards.

The high living standards in the countries you reference isn't because of socialism. It's because of capitalism. Socialism can't create such a thing.

 

[StoneByStone]

Are you saying socialism is different because democratic is put in front of it?

To me, the word "Socialism" doesn't mean anything any more.
What I'm saying is that most Americans want the kind of policies Fox News would call "Socialism."

Are you saying that if there are 5 people, 3 of which refuse to do for themselves and 2 that are self sufficient, that the 3 leeches voting to have the 2 successful people fund their wants is different than if an authoritarian government made a dictatorial decision?

No. And very few Americans want that. This is why there are no real Marxists in mainstream politics.

 

[StoneByStone]

The high living standards in the countries you reference isn't because of socialism. It's because of capitalism. Socialism can't create such a thing.

Sure, but it's not the kind of Capitalism we have in America. These countries have mostly free markets with regulations to help the poor. As opposed to America, where the regulations help the rich. Basically, they have "Fox News Socialism."

 

[MAGA MAN]

Would you say it's stupid to allow women to vote and gays to get married?

Anyone who isn't a felon and at least 21 should be able to vote, IMO. FedCo shouldn't be involved in marriage in any capacity.

 

[MAGA MAN]

...America, where the regulations help the rich.

Examples?

 

[CFM]

To me, the word "Socialism" doesn't mean anything any more.
What I'm saying is that most Americans want the kind of policies Fox News would call "Socialism."



No. And very few Americans want that. This is why there are no real Marxists in mainstream politics.

So you won't answer a simple question, huh?

There are real Marxists in politics. They've fooled idiots like you that what they call socialism isn't the same because the word "democratic" is used with it.

 

[CFM]

Sure, but it's not the kind of Capitalism we have in America. These countries have mostly free markets with regulations to help the poor. As opposed to America, where the regulations help the rich. Basically, they have "Fox News Socialism."

Prove the regulations we have in the U.S. help the rich. So many claim it yet none have shown how it is so.

 

[StoneByStone]

So you won't answer a simple question, huh?

What was the question?

There are real Marxists in politics.

Which politicians have called for collective ownership?

 

[StoneByStone]

Prove the regulations we have in the U.S. help the rich. So many claim it yet none have shown how it is so.

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-income-inequality-20171215-story.html

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/how-the-rich-use-the-government-to-enrich-themselves.html

https://www.alternet.org/2011/09/4_ways_government_policy_favors_the_rich_and_keeps_the_rest_of_us_poor/

 

[countryboy]

The last one is only "the truth" to White Nationalist Nazi scum like you. Nice Hitler-esque propaganda imagery.

 

[countryboy]

You believe that shit.

I doubt it. He/she/it is just a lying leftist loon.

 

[StoneByStone]

The last one is only "the truth" to White Nationalist Nazi scum like you. Nice Hitler-esque propaganda imagery.

I'm not a White Nationalist or a member of a German political party that no longer exists.
I'm an Ethnic Nationalist who accept that all of our wars are for Israel.

And by the way, the fact that you think it's possible to be both a White Nationalist and a Nazi just shows how incorrectly these terms are used in the mainstream media.

 

[CFM]

What was the question?



Which politicians have called for collective ownership?

The one you didn't answer, boy. It only gets asked once. If you refuse to answer it the first time, you've proven you're not going to.

Socialism is more than collective ownership. I thought you'd know that.

 

[Legion]

 

[StoneByStone]

The one you didn't answer, boy. It only gets asked once. If you refuse to answer it the first time, you've proven you're not going to.

So you don't remember either.

Socialism is more than collective ownership. I thought you'd know that.

Sure, but collective ownership is one of the most important parts of Marxism. So which politicians have revealed themselves to be Marxist by calling for collective ownership?

 

[Legion]

I was just thinking the same thing.

I don’t remember any leftist calling you a troll when you were aiming your considerable talents at the right.

I have often wondered if you really have a political compass or if you just like to bust balls

Where you find victory, you will find Legion. And vice versa.

 

[CFM]

So you don't remember either.



Sure, but collective ownership is one of the most important parts of Marxism. So which politicians have revealed themselves to be Marxist by calling for collective ownership?

I remember. It was made clear why it won't be asked again. You'll refuse to answer it a second time.

Collective ownership isn't a requirement for someone to be a socialist. There were a lot of people that truly thought Obama's policies were good. There were just as many, if not more, that voted for him due to his skin color without knowledge of any of his policies.