It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Vector99
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
USSR comes to mind
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Krazysh0t
That is what socialism is. OMG you don't even know what socialism is.
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
To be honest I just had to go out for a smoke as I was thinking the same thing...
PLease show me evidence that socialism does not work, as in write something substantial with links and historical reference.
Actually show me how it does not work.
All you have done is name two defunct communist regimes, that is not proof that socialism does not work.
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
To be honest I just had to go out for a smoke as I was thinking the same thing...
PLease show me evidence that socialism does not work, as in write something substantial with links and historical reference.
Actually show me how it does not work.
All you have done is name two defunct communist regimes, that is not proof that socialism does not work.
How many millions of dead people will it take to convince you?
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
To be honest I just had to go out for a smoke as I was thinking the same thing...
PLease show me evidence that socialism does not work, as in write something substantial with links and historical reference.
Actually show me how it does not work.
All you have done is name two defunct communist regimes, that is not proof that socialism does not work.
How many millions of dead people will it take to convince you?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
To be honest I just had to go out for a smoke as I was thinking the same thing...
PLease show me evidence that socialism does not work, as in write something substantial with links and historical reference.
Actually show me how it does not work.
All you have done is name two defunct communist regimes, that is not proof that socialism does not work.
How many millions of dead people will it take to convince you?
You know. I normally have a lot of respect for your posts because you seem to put effort into your opinions on things (especially your knowledge of Libertarianism) so I find it HIGHLY insulting that you'd stoop to such low brow tactics to dismiss Socialism. Even when I was advocating Libertarian I considered comparing Socialims to Communism like they are the same thing as lazy arguing. So if you aren't going to respect the other side of the debate, I may have to reduce my opinion of you.
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
originally posted by: Vector99
First we need to educate.
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Is the definition of socialism. In a socialist society individuals do not own businesses, co-op's or the state does.
Now let's ask again. How is America socialist?
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Vector99
First we need to educate.
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Is the definition of socialism. In a socialist society individuals do not own businesses, co-op's or the state does.
Now let's ask again. How is America socialist?
Did you notice the word "or"
originally posted by: Vector99
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Vector99
First we need to educate.
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Is the definition of socialism. In a socialist society individuals do not own businesses, co-op's or the state does.
Now let's ask again. How is America socialist?
Did you notice the word "or"
Did I notice a word I typed? Yes, indeed I did.
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
For starters, the USSR and Nazi Germany come to mind.
Forgive my serious response if you were you just playing with me.
To be honest I just had to go out for a smoke as I was thinking the same thing...
PLease show me evidence that socialism does not work, as in write something substantial with links and historical reference.
Actually show me how it does not work.
All you have done is name two defunct communist regimes, that is not proof that socialism does not work.
How many millions of dead people will it take to convince you?
You know. I normally have a lot of respect for your posts because you seem to put effort into your opinions on things (especially your knowledge of Libertarianism) so I find it HIGHLY insulting that you'd stoop to such low brow tactics to dismiss Socialism. Even when I was advocating Libertarian I considered comparing Socialims to Communism like they are the same thing as lazy arguing. So if you aren't going to respect the other side of the debate, I may have to reduce my opinion of you.
I merely state fact.
I detect an irreconcilable impasse.
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: Vector99
originally posted by: nonspecific
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: greencmp
Socialism is an economic system which is entirely dependent upon the beneficent guidance of omniscient rulers and omnipotent enforcement.
Well since the people are in charge of the government, they are beholden to elect the right people to make sure that is the case now isn't it?
Are you saying the omniscient and omnipotent governance is possible?
Well it's certainly possible. Though highly unlikely. Though I don't look at things in such a black and white scope. I recognize that no form of governance is without corruption or special interests. That doesn't mean that an idea like Socialism cannot improve over a system of smaller government. Socialism works. History proves that is the case.
History proves exactly the opposite.
Could you provide some evidence to back this up if possible please?
Many thanks.
USSR comes to mind
No sorry you are mistaken, I was asking for evidence.
You just wrote 4 words, that is not even a full sentance never mind evidence.
In a way, communism is an extreme form of socialism. Many countries have dominant socialist political parties but very few are truly communist. In fact, most countries - including staunch capitalist bastions like the U.S. and U.K. - have government programs that borrow from socialist principles. "Socialism" is sometimes used interchangeably with "communism" but the two philosophies have some stark differences. Most notably, while communism is a political system, socialism is primarily an economic system that can exist in various forms under a wide range of political systems.