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.

 

36% of Americans have a positive view of socialism

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


What they are doing is a variation on Fabianism.

socialism to be established by gradual reforms within the law

www.google.com...:fabianism&ei=tHVuS7K7H4nUtgOto4CyDQ&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved=0 CAkQkAE

en.wikipedia.org...

Fa·bi·an (fb-n)
adj.
1.
a. Of or relating to the caution and avoidance of direct confrontation typical of the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus.
b. Cautious or dilatory, as in taking action.
2. Of, relating to, or being a member of the Fabian Society, which was committed to gradual rather than revolutionary means for spreading socialist principles.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

Main Entry: Fa·bi·an
Pronunciation: \ˈfā-bē-ən\
Function: adjective
Date: 1638

1 a : of, relating to, or in the manner of the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus known for his defeat of Hannibal in the Second Punic War by the avoidance of decisive contests b : cautious, dilatory
2 [the Fabian Society; from the members' belief in slow rather than revolutionary change in government] : of, relating to, or being a society of socialists organized in England in 1884 to spread socialist principles gradually

www.merriam-webster.com...



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by pai mei
 


Ok, can I address some problems with what you posted?

1) We live in a Republic, not a Democracy, more accurately, we live in a Representative Democracy, which means it's not always majority rule.

2) I am not completely against Socialism. In spite of not reading what I actually wrote on this subject, you inferred. I am against a complete socialist state, because in a complete socialist state, there is no real reason to work hard for what you want out of life.

3) No where have I said that I am the only person that works. But I do believe in working for what you want out of life. Sure, we all can't be millionaires, but success isn't always determined by the amount of digits in one's bank account.

4) Some things I believe should always be free. For instance, education, without quality education, one really can't rise up to their full potential. Without access to quality health care, people die because they are too poor. That shouldn't be.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


I highly respect your views whatukno.

I only have questions in regards to education. While I believe, as you do, an education....that is, the attainment of knowledge by an individual is key to success, I would argue that such being subjected to a state run education isn't helpful at all. Overall I am practically on the same page as you except where the benefits are derived from.

That I believe is reserved for a future thread that pertains to such questions.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Why "Free education" and not "Free food". I mean - you die without food.
Why not "Free food" ? I tell you why : because if food was free, people would be free. By "free food" I mean people cooperating and obtaining the basics for living. With our modern machines - that is very little work. After that - they will be really free to choose if they want to work more and fill their house with stuff, or take it easy and LIVE a little.

Here is a thread of mine I wrote more there :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 7-2-2010 by pai mei]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Nice job of confusing socialism with communism, yet again JPZ!

It seems you, who has always lived in a pure capitalist country, "knows" the difference between socialism and communism better than the people who have ACTUALLY LIVED there for decades.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Corporatism

control of a state or organization by large interest groups; "individualism is in danger of being swamped by a kind of corporatism"

www.google.com...:corporatism&ei=KnhuS83LO42usgOk092xDQ&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved =0CAkQkAE

Corporatism

en.wikipedia.org...

Main Entry: cor·po·rat·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈkȯr-p(ə-)rə-ˌti-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1890

: the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction

www.merriam-webster.com...

corporatism [ˈkɔːpərɪtɪzəm -prɪtɪzəm]
n
(Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the organization of a state on a corporative basis
corporatist n & adj

www.thefreedictionary.com...

corporatism

Political system in which power is exercised through large organizations (businesses, trade unions, etc) working in concert with each other, under the direction of the state.

www.allwords.com...






Capitalism

an economic system based on private ownership of capital

www.google.com...:capitalism&ei=k3puS53oKo_usgO_57iyDQ&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved= 0CAkQkAE

Main Entry: cap·i·tal·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈka-pə-tə-ˌliz-əm, ˈkap-tə-, British also kə-ˈpi-tə-\
Function: noun
Date: 1877

: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

www.merriam-webster.com...

capitalism


Definition
Economic system characterized by the following: private property ownership exists; individuals and companies are allowed to compete for their own economic gain; and free market forces determine the prices of goods and services. Such a system is based on the premise of separating the state and business activities. Capitalists believe that markets are efficient and should thus function without interference, and the role of the state is to regulate and protect.

www.investorwords.com...

cap⋅i⋅tal⋅ism
  /ˈkæpɪtlˌɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

dictionary.reference.com...

capitalism

Definition

Economic system based (to a varying degree) on private ownership of the factors of production (capital, land, and labor) employed in generation of profits. It is the oldest and most common of all economic systems and, in general, is synonymous with free market system.

www.businessdictionary.com...




posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Nice job of confusing socialism with communism, yet again JPZ!

It seems you, who has always lived in a pure capitalist country, "knows" the difference between socialism and communism better than the people who have ACTUALLY LIVED there for decades.






Yep, that's right. It was I alone who single handed influenced all these dictionaries and lexicographers and convinced them all to see it my way. Now, if I could just get you to see it my way.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by pai mei
 



Why "Free education" and not "Free food". I mean - you die without food.


The problem with free food is that with free food there is no reason to work, if people are given free food, free shelter, free utilities, what is the point?

In the animal kingdom, even pack animals have to work for their food.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:56 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 




My high school teacher in New Jersey told us(and I still remember it to this day) exactly what I told you in my earlier post. Please don't make me repeat everything. I will further explain socialism: (and do not trust wikipedia for a moment) A hybrid eco-political system where major industry is government owned and controlled while everything else is private/corporate.


As I said, capitalism is a FORM of an economic system. It HAS NOTHING to do with governance. What your teacher was telling you was totally misleading. That is NOT capitalism. That is fascism/corporatism. Corporatism being a new fancy name for fascism.

Fascism being control of major sections of the economic system in a country.

Now, with the bail outs and then the takeover of said businesses is the end result of socialism/communism.

You are arguing semantics and still not seeing the inherent problem of what is going on in our country. Why was it so good in the 50's and 60's economics wise? It was because the fiat money system was still based on a tangible asset. Now it is all based on perception.

If one actually believes that capitalism was alive and well in the past 40 years has NO idea about economic systems.

ALL of the current problems can be traced EXACTLY to the government/corporate control and intervention in the market. The more you listen to the hog wash that comes from the MSM and current economic literature, the more you feed into ignorance.

Do you actually believe the economic advisors to the past 6 presidents have any inclination to make the normal person better off? The more power we give them, the more the difference between the megacorps/bankster/government masters and the people.

People just keep falling for the supposed evil rich people ploy. The evil rich people they want to destroy are you and me. Anyone in the economic middle class is who they want to destroy. They do not want anyone to compete with the mega corps or the bankster fraudsters. That is it, that is always the plan of the elite. We are not allowed to compete with them. Sound FAMILIAR? Why is it that back in the 50's-70's were able to work 30 years and retire and now we have to work 40-45 years? Is it because the evil rich, NO, it is because of the out of control government taxation system, including the devaluation of the very DOLLAR that use to have value. Now, you have to spend your money or it loses 5% per year. It no longer increases in value, just the opposite.

The true evil rich people, behind the banks and mega corps and government.

Deny ignorance.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
All of you can label any damn thing you want, does not mean it is what you label it.

TO ME, IT LOOKS TO BE TOTALITARIANISM!


So you want us to invent new terminology just to make you happy? Or maybe just listen to cnn and go from there?
I am sorry if you guys don't like the truth and the truth is you've been taken aboard a sinking ship as fools.

Totalitarianism is irrellevant of any economic system, it simply means strong dogma and iron will! Facism in italy and Nazism in germany were totalitarian socialist systems. Nazism was also called *National Socialism* because of its imperialistic fashion. This will make some socialists angry at me but so be it, the truth must be told.

Communism and capitalism can also be totalitarian as witnessed by stalin in russia and bush in america, respectively! If three people #ed up those 3 systems should we identify each system with them? I think not!!!




Call it what it is, CONTROL! Who the frell cares what you want to label it, I no longer want ANY part of the bull# any longer.

4 stars for your inconsequential comment. There is denying ignorance! /s


Maybe ATS is too much for you? Try yahoo or cnn instead!


[edit on 7-2-2010 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by pai mei
 



Why "Free education" and not "Free food". I mean - you die without food.


The problem with free food is that with free food there is no reason to work, if people are given free food, free shelter, free utilities, what is the point?

In the animal kingdom, even pack animals have to work for their food.



Who gives them ? They themselves... After that - work or party as much as you like.

[edit on 7-2-2010 by pai mei]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by pai mei
 


Not everyone is a farmer or a rancher, so no, they can't give it to themselves. I am sure it would work well for those with a few head of cattle and enough land to plant crops, but for those in the cities, that is just not going to work.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Of course. What am I talking about. Reorganize everything. Only 3% of the workforce works in agriculture now. You work in turns. Each person works 1 month a year (even less) - at the farm or factory where the basics are produced. After that free time and free basics. Work for more or do whatever you want. Follow your passion. Meditate. Party, play, paint, sing, travel. Whatever. "Live".

The Gospel of Consumption

Today “work and more work” is the accepted way of doing things. If anything, improvements to the labor-saving machinery since the 1920s have intensified the trend. Machines can save labor, but only if they go idle when we possess enough of what they can produce. In other words, the machinery offers us an opportunity to work less, an opportunity that as a society we have chosen not to take. Instead, we have allowed the owners of those machines to define their purpose: not reduction of labor, but “higher productivity”—and with it the imperative to consume virtually everything that the machinery can possibly produce.




[edit on 7-2-2010 by pai mei]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by pai mei
 


I can't agree with that, first you would have to take away the farms and ranches from the people who own them, then you would have to take the factories away from the business people and the investors that own those. No way, it wouldn't work in the USA



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
As I said, capitalism is a FORM of an economic system. It HAS NOTHING to do with governance. What your teacher was telling you was totally misleading. That is NOT capitalism. That is fascism/corporatism. Corporatism being a new fancy name for fascism.


Corporatism is ultra-capitalism(monopoly capitalism) whereas fascism was imperialistic socialism. The two have nothing in common other than the fact BOTH ARE TOTALITARIAN!


Originally posted by endisnighe
Fascism being control of major sections of the economic system in a country.


Substitute "fascism" with *ultra-capitalism/corporatism/monopoly capitalism* and I will agree with you.


Originally posted by endisnighe
Now, with the bail outs and then the takeover of said businesses is the end result of socialism/communism.


Ok but you are forgetting that the US government is officially a corporation after THE ACT OF 1871, and by consequence that makes all previously sovereign states now corporations as well.

You don't have to believe me, just do a google search.


Originally posted by endisnighe
You are arguing semantics and still not seeing the inherent problem of what is going on in our country. Why was it so good in the 50's and 60's economics wise? It was because the fiat money system was still based on a tangible asset. Now it is all based on perception.


The Federal Reserve Bank of America was instituted in the second decade of the 20th century by president woodrow wilson(if I am not mistaken).

Since then the money belongs to the shareholders of that bank, which is also a corporation! In fact its registered in the state of Delaware as a non-profit religious corporation.

Don't believe me? Do your own research!


Originally posted by endisnighe
If one actually believes that capitalism was alive and well in the past 40 years has NO idea about economic systems.

ALL of the current problems can be traced EXACTLY to the government/corporate control and intervention in the market. The more you listen to the hog wash that comes from the MSM and current economic literature, the more you feed into ignorance.

Do you actually believe the economic advisors to the past 6 presidents have any inclination to make the normal person better off? The more power we give them, the more the difference between the megacorps/bankster/government masters and the people.


I agree 100%! You got the basic idea down but get mixed up with the details. Please do not get angry if some people disagree with you as no one knows all the truth. Some people do more research, some do less, some have no clue.

[edit on 7-2-2010 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Agreed. See, that was not so terribly difficult.

As I said, definitions and meanings behind words get blurred over time.

The whole difference in what we are saying can be attributed to the decades we were trained in or the time frame of the books or reference sources we quote.

As for the Fed Reserve, yes it was instituted back in 1913 but the removal of an asset based money system was not removed until the Kennedy era.

As for the corporation of the US, all is good, I know all about it. I also know about the replaced 13th amendment of the Constitution.

I am not a corporation except in the view of my illegal government. I am not subject to corporate laws, at least in the near future I will not be. Plan on demanding my straw man corporation to be destroyed in the near future.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 04:01 AM
link   
We already have systems of socialism, capitalism, fascism, whatever right here in the U.S. of A.

These are just words. You choose your reality.

You want socialism???... be a bum, a welfare recipient, what have you.
You want fascism???... join any enforcement agency.
You want capitalism???... be a businessman.
You want communism???... freak out with the Californians.

Again, in America we let everybody play the game. I say it over and over again.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
The whole difference in what we are saying can be attributed to the decades we were trained in or the time frame of the books or reference sources we quote.


And by subtle(or not so subtle) media manipulation, sponsored by the NWO worldwide. In america it was, and still is, more pervasive because corporations have their headquarters there.

They are desperately trying to make socialism look bad by equating it to communism, eventhough socialism is to communism what socialism is to capitalism. In other words, its a in-between hybrid sytem.

Don't be fooled! Ironically the russians and chinesse were promissed "great opportunities" after the fall of communism but instead got rogue military agents acting as mafia and western european socialists buying up whatever was governmental. Everything used to belong to the people, now it belongs to the highest bidder. No one is immune from these vampires.

[edit on 7-2-2010 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Socialsim:

# a political theory advocating state ownership of industry
# an economic system based on state ownership of capital
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Socialism

en.wikipedia.org...

Snipped and shortened



Here we go again! and here we can see many of the problems with the definitions from these different websites trying to explain what SOCIALISM really is, often from an American point of view.

They are doing their best to explain things in their favour


What they often do and what they are explaining here is some kind of definition of STATE SOCIALISM, like the system we saw in USSR - which wasn't real and true Socialism because Rothschild and Rockefellers owned all the means production from the beginning. Without them and the Fabian Society financing the authoritarian state communist dictatorship - there would not had been any USSR in history.

So to use this as an example of Socialism is flawed and biased.

USSR was not a socialist system, it was an Authoritarian Dictatorship where the state and the means of the production was owned by western capitalists.

USSR was nothing more than a constructed gigantic social experiment - and the experiences and knowledge thereof will be an important part for them to implement in their New World Order. A capitalistic free market systems with a social conscience as it was meant from the beginning of Capitalism.

(Therefore I suspect the NWO will be a new mix of Capitalism and the better parts of Social Democratic theory)

If we want to have a fair explaination about what Socialism really is, we have to look elsewhere, like the real & genuine Oxford English Dictionary:

socialism

• noun a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

www.askoxford.com...

And finally! here we can see the real definition about what Socialism is.

Socialism is workers/community ownership of the means of production.

Nothing more, nothing less! if someone are trying to tell you anything
else, it's biased propaganda and they are lying.


But I also understand that by the American standards and by the American political spectrum is almost impossible to apply what socialism really is.

If you take traditionally center-right politics here here in Europe applied to the American political spectrum - you'll get on the left side of the economic spectrum in USA.

It's impossible to translate the European political spectrum to the American political spectrum directly!

And to get a fair view one need to understand what happened in the Industrial cities during the early 1900th century

The meaning of the workers/community ownership of the means of production is that the workers can enjoy the fruits of their labor & sweat and share the profit in the community instead of having all the profit going down the pockets of a few that gives little back to the community in the society; the majority of the society who created this wealth from the beginning with their labour!

Socialism evolved from the industrial revolution that shook Europe in the first half of the 19th century and where the workers were exploited by the factory owners and Industrialists.

The condition of the worker community was often horrible, and they were no more than under-paid slaves to the ownership of the production in dirty Industrial cities in Europe where also the Industrialist owned all the housing around the factories, and the workers had to pay a huge part of the salary for a small dirty room as rent when the families where forced to move from the countryside to the cities to survive the higher living costs brought upon them by the Industrialists and capitalists in the society.

"No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."

"Labour was the first price, the original purchase - money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased."

"As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce."

"To feel much for others and little for ourselves; to restrain our selfishness and exercise our benevolent affections, constitute the perfection of human nature."

ADAM SMITH

In the end even Adam Smith saw all this misery in the worker communities and workers living in poverty, and that absolutely uncorrupted free markets where the market forces are guided by the great theory of an invisible hand, witout any interference was not without flaws

Adam Smith had a genuine and abiding concern for workers and the poor where the worker should recieve high wages for their labour so they could be an important part of the capaitalistic system - he wanted that everyone should enjoy more of the fruits of their labour which would then increase their contribution to capitalism as a whole in the society - this was the core essence of Adams Smith's economic theory about capitalism and society (and we have now seen how that went in reality)

Adam Smith's ideal was a market comprised solely of small buyers and sellers, and with high wages for the poor workers for their labour- but this theory was soon out of the window and outdated by evil forces who wanted to control the population and further exploit the workers by all means possible.

The invisible hand was quickly manipulated by cartels and monopolies of big corporations and therefore also offset the rules and the core of capitalism which then led to more exploitation and higher living costs and horrible conditions for the workers.

The invisible hand had become hijacked, crippled and lame - and out of order!

The American workers has to be the only people indoctrinated enough to openly take the same side as their elite rich Industrial oppressors and also defend that politic against themselves and their better judgement - and I find that to be very amusing!
but also very sad!


And mind you! I'm not a practicing socialist! I created my first company when I was 19 years old, but I have also lost everything a couple of times, and I'm almost out of business right now.

And here in Europe it's damn much harder to start a new business, and sometimes I personally wish that creating a business should be much easier, like it is in the USA.

But everyone in a capitalistic society can't be self employed and have their own companies - you'll need workers and resources to exploit for the system of Capitalism as it is now - to work!

IMO the best society model and dream would be a cooperation of self employed workers who together started their own small corporations with good loans from some uncorrupted institution with low interest (similar to credit unions maybe?).

And then shared the profits of the fruits of their labour based on how much work you have produced and done.

If you want to work 60 hours a week to buy a bigger home, fine! you'll get a bigger share of the profit compared to Johnny who prefer to live small and chose to work only the minimum 30 hour a week this year, so he can enjoy more time with his hobbies like fishing and hunting together with his kids.

What I say is; cut out the main hand who take the profits of your work in their own pocket!

We would be much better off as a society and feel so much better about ourselves if we lived in such society and together owned the means of production ourselves.


[edit on 7-2-2010 by Chevalerous]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I reread through the posts and I had to bring up what is going on now in the US. Our government is selling things like roads, buildings, parking meters, land etc etc etc to outside countries and corporations.

They are selling our country out underneath us. These things were purchased and built by the taxpayer and now these CROOKS are selling our country.

I feel any bureaucrat with their signatures on any of this blatant corruption should be brought up on TREASON charges.

I believe this is the purpose behind the economic collapse. It was all planned to destroy the US to help usher in the NWO with the elites in control of everything and every country.

Just like they did back in the first Great Depression when they bought up all the assets. I remember my altered history books and the explanations the books gave to these actions. They called them altruistic in their actions.

What a bunch of hogwash. They initiate the collapse and they say they are helping us out, of the conflagration they created.

Later.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join