I have come to embrace Socialism!

Originally posted by brianmg5


Really? You really thought it was necessary to say this in a debate?

Slandering Millions of Russians who have suffered from socialism by saying they had no food shortages before the fall is supposed to be better?

If someone is falsifying a History that is widely accepted as fact on both sides of the fence, the reasons for this are either extreme ignorance, ill-intent or loss of memory. Implying that memory loss was involved was the most polite of the options.

Originally posted by Wally Hope
Capitalism keeps resources artificially scares in order to maintain market prices at the expense of those that need those resources.

Nice reversal of facts. Its socialism that always suffers from scarcity, not capitalism.

I didn't read the last 3 pages because I got tired of all the BS.

Asking for an Americans (generalisation) opinion on Socialism is like asking a monkey to build a space-ship.


I can't believe no-one has mentioned: Liberation Theology

Also this may be of interest:



And for now I will just finish with something to rock out to:



BTW

reply to post by Skyfloating


Is that why American corporations dump thousands of tonnes of grain into the ocean to keep prices high?

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Is that why American corporations dump thousands of tonnes of grain into the ocean to keep prices high?

Waste and generating artificial scarcity is not my idea of Capitalism, obviously. These are things that need to monitored and changed.

reply to post by Skyfloating

They did better decades ago, back when the Reps and Dems still practiced Capitalism.

When exactly was this?

When do you consider the most pure time frame of capitalism in America?

reply to post by Skyfloating


Sounds like Socialism to me, you know government regulation, exerting a degree of control over corporations and stuff.

*makes that puzzled look dogs make*

reply to post by Skyfloating

Once you have money, it means nothing anymore. All that has meaning then is making the community a better place and serving mankind.

This is exactly correct. Money only means something to those that do not have it. Sadly most who have it do not put it back into the community or back into the pockets of those workers that helped them obtain that wealth.

If this were the case you would not see the HUGE disparity between rich and poor in this country. 90% of the US make 100k or less. And that top 10% own 71%! of all the wealth.

Most of the individuals and corporations with wealth do not give back fairly to those that helped them obtain that vast wealth. Workers in this country are vastly underpaid compared to the CEOs and top management.

You say you are a capitalist who no longer really cares about money because you have plenty. Why dont you give all your workers a raise? Forget "investing" in the community. Pay the people who helped you get to where you are now.

CEO to Worker Wage Gap

Originally posted by Skyfloating
To learn more about Socialism I also recommend you Wikipedia

Stalin_ Insane dictator
Lenin Very good
Mao _ Prize idiot and murder
Pol Pot_ Mass murderer
Castro_ Found communism 3/4 of the way into the revolution.
Mugabe _ Sick tyrant
Chavez- Oh please

the socialist "heroes" of the last 100 years.

This person needs to read beyond wiki. At least I read Adam Smith. Don't go for the kneejerkers.

Just read Marx and Lenin and then perhaps move to Trotsky. Having found socialism try to develop a critique of socialism.It is all in the dialiectics.

Very soon America will realise that captialism is not working. Most capitlist do not understand what is really good about socialism.

Originally posted by endtimer
reply to post by ImAnAlienOnMyOwnPlanet

 

You say you are a person just like everyone else? In what sense? Do you really
think that everyone else embraces this sick stuff? Socialism has never worked
in any country on this planet in any time of history. Don't compare yourself to
everyone else.

And to compare Jesus to Socialism is really, really sick.

I think Canada needs believers like yourself. Get packing !!

The OP is a person in the sense that he is a member of the human race and is entitled to the same things you and I are. Including their opinion.
Democracy has never worked either.
You're right, he wasn't a socialist. In essence, he was more of a communist.

reply to post by endtimer


socialism hasnt worked in any country at anytime? how about sweden, Norway, even england has sosialized healthcare, it works a MILLION times better than in the US

reply to post by Skyfloating


monitored and changed by whom? isnt intervention going against the idea of capitalism?

Originally posted by IFA420
reply to post by endtimer

 

socialism hasnt worked in any country at anytime? how about sweden, Norway, even england has sosialized healthcare, it works a MILLION times better than in the US

Well for Norway, it's not working. 9 months waiting for them to take an X-ray, then another 6 months to get surgery.
I'm paying my way out of the line, at private clinics in other countries.

Myself and most people that i know have private health insurance. (we have the world's most expensive dental treatment as well)

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by brianmg5


Really? You really thought it was necessary to say this in a debate?

Slandering Millions of Russians who have suffered from socialism by saying they had no food shortages before the fall is supposed to be better?

If someone is falsifying a History that is widely accepted as fact on both sides of the fence, the reasons for this are either extreme ignorance, ill-intent or loss of memory. Implying that memory loss was involved was the most polite of the options.

Can you not give up the Russia comparisons? No socialist buys that crap. Russia was not socialist, nor communist, and to blame their problems on socialism is ignorant.

...In summary then, to the answer to the question of was Russia socialist, we’d have to say no, Russia did indeed have a real working class revolution, and was on the road to socialism, but it was prevented from getting there. It is a task of the future for the revolution to be completed in Russia, and beyond that, to expand the revolution to the whole world. It is only then that all of us will finally be able to live in a world that is based on solidarity, and that is free of exploitation, oppression and alienation.

www.socialistaction.org...

This is where the myth that socialism means tyrannical government comes from, the misunderstanding of the reality due to being media educated.

Originally posted by IFA420
reply to post by endtimer

 

socialism hasnt worked in any country at anytime? how about sweden, Norway, even england has sosialized healthcare, it works a MILLION times better than in the US

Socialized health care is not Socialism. Social programs are not socialism. Social is used because the term means something that pertains to society as a whole. Social security is not socialism, social engineering is not socialism.

Socialism is the workers ownership of the means of production and distribution. That is the foundation of socialism, without the workers ownership of the means of production it is not socialism.

Those countries you mention still have private ownership of the means of production, which makes them capitalist.
They are just more liberal than most.

My own definition of socialism- Hand over your money to the government first and let the government decide how much of their money now you can keep and how you may spend their money. ^Y^

Originally posted by BobbinHood
Admittedly, I didn't read the article, but I bet I can guess the arguments used there.

Jesus was a big advocate for charity, but did you see him helping the poor with other peoples money? No, of course not. Nor did he advocate government involvement in taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

Jesus was an altruist, not a socialist; too often people confuse the two. The flaw to the argument is that charity, when mandated, is no longer charity at all - it is theft. Jesus was not a thief, nor did he have the Robin Hood syndrome socialists seem to be so fond of.

Where did he get the money to help the poor? He certainly didn't have it and what did he tell rich people how to get into heaven? Give everything you have to the poor. Sure sounds like using other peoples money to help the poor to me.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Wow, slandering millions of Russians... Skyfloating, I am shocked that a moderator with so many flags and stars would speak to me this way. Is this all you can come up with? Come on! Instead of focusing on me, why don't you bring facts out! Every time I read one of your responses, you are targeting me instead of the debate at hand. Notice how I never retaliate and lower myself to your level? And I always answer with an argument instead of an insult? hmmm... It's always, "history says this" and "history says that"... I don't know where you are from but you've obviously never been to the USSR, and everything you've learned seems to be from Fox or CNN or other MSM as you use their talking points tactics in this "debate".... DENY IGNORANCE!

Here's my answer to your post though...

Recorded history in the west and recorded history in the east are never the going to be the same. There is one reason for that: they come from a different view point. It is a known fact that people who record history, do so according to their side and according to how they see fit.

I.E. ask someone is south east asia when WWII ended and they will tell you that it ended WAY after you think.

The USSR was not like China, NK, or the other asian "non-american like" states. The USSR was powerful and had many industries, it had a self sustaining economy, meaning it didn't need to import anything if it didn't want to; did you ever look at a map of the USSR and see how big it was? It had everything it needed.

All I'm saying is that the people of the USSR had good lives and lived very well, even better than modern day Americans. They may not all have been happy, considering that WWII claimed well over 20 million soviet lives, the US was threatening to blow them to bits during the cold war, and that people around the world wanted them to stop being "different".

Yet, they had a free house, free food, freedom to choose a trade/employment, free health care when they get sick, free education, all the TOILET PAPER THEY NEED, and ALL THE VODKA THEY WANT... What's so wrong about that?

This does not fare well with westerners who have to pay for everything they want and need. Sick and can't pay? No problem! Your insurance company (if you can afford it, you know, it was too expensive to go to university and get a good job with insurance so you have to pay it yourself!) decided that it won't cover you anymore! Pre existing condition, they have to make profits too you know! You keep getting worse. Then you can't work anymore, then you lose your house, your car... Then you die sick, hungry, and alone like an animal.... No funeral. Nothing.... Is this what America is all about? Do what you want, but don't ask me for help because you are nothing to me...

That's disgusting... At least the Soviets had something right, nobody suffered losing their home, job, nobody was starving, and everyone had health care and an education...

Skyfloating, if you respond with a personal attack or some useless sarcastic comment instead of an good argument, I will ignore you and of course report you.

Magnum

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by brianmg5

When the majority of people decide they want to give freely and vote as such, should the world continue to be held back by the minority of those who still seek selfish ends?

This very question is the beginning of authoritarianism. Its the idea that individuals need to be put in line with the collective. Its based on the notion that you should or even can control everyone all the time. But they cant. Attempting to do so is a waste of time and the cause of conflict. You are more likely to be held back by Collectivist Governments than by single Individuals.

Would you care to offer any comments on the rest of that post? I would honestly be interested in hearing your responses and furthering debating this with you.

I don't remember who said this but someone mentioned that capitalism makes for innovation and makes people strive for it as socialism makes for people who hand out their hand to the government to be given everything....

I will mention a few things:

Sputnik
Kalashnikov's AK series weapons
Nuclear weapons
Soyuz

The USSR designed, built and operated there own things. They did strive to create and build. They weren't lazy people...