I dislike the Right wing...

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by Jordan River

 

lol

I live in michigan, auto industry...

lol
i have no concern at all which turd lands in the throne
next nov 5.

just momentarily curious as to what you think voting is for

There's been no jobs in michigan since 03

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
I do agree that the motivations you have cited by the British upper middle class (which is entirely different from the modern U.S. upper middle class) in championing the creation of a working class social safety net sound reasonable.

Finally, you are inferring that Winston Churchill, one of the most effective political figures in shaping the post war modern world did not understand the correct definition of Socialism?

No I believe Churchill new exactly what socialism is, and that is why he new it wasn't liberalism.

Your previous argument has been that National Socialism is a far right ideology and socialist in name only. was In the post you also stated that Adolph Hitler and the architects of the NSDAP did not understand the correct definition of Socialism and had misused the term when naming their new political ideology National Socialism.

National Socialism has nothing to do with left-wing socialism. I did not say they did not know the correct definition, they changed the definition for their own agenda. They did not mean 'worker ownership' when they used the term. When socialists use socialism they mean worker ownership.

I would also point out that when your further pronouncement of fascism and socialism being mutually exclusive was refuted by the examples of Stalinist Soviet Union and Castro's post revolution Marxist Cuba, your answer was to denounce both as not being actual Socialist governments.

Stalin wasn't a socialist either, he was simply another person in authority using left-wing terms for their own agenda.

Do you know enough about late early 20th century/ post history to know that 1920's Germany's neutered government was much more desperate for a "Social Safety net" to care for the needs of millions left to the economic ravishes of the Versailles Treaty?

That is not true. The government wasn't neutered at all, the Nazi Party was the government. The Nazi Party did a lot for the people, it doesn't make it socialist. His government was fascist. He did not support worker ownership and put socialists, communists, anarchists, trade unionists in prison camps.

Historically, Winston Churchill says that the post industrial U.K. government has a responsibility to provide for the basic well being of its Labor class who cannot. When he says he is a liberal, not a Socialist you use the quote as an example to illustrate that he was wrong and was preaching a form of diluted Socialism.

No not at all. He was not preaching socialism, he was preaching liberalism. I use the quote as some evidence that socialism and liberalism are not the same thing, as most rightist, and a few neo-liberals seem to think. I am trying to make you see there is a distinct difference, and they came from different places. Liberalism came from the upper classes, socialism came from the working classes. Socialists did not support the Liberals. Marx stopped using the term 'socialism' and used 'communism' because of the Liberals appropriation of the term 'socialism'. Liberals trying to use the term socialism is nothing new.

Historically, Adolph Hitler says that post war, debt burdened Germany has a responsibility to enact an even more progressive social program than Churchill proposed 15 years later, they name the new political party the National Socialist German Workers' Party. You use the Nazi's Governments heavily State controlled privatised industry, a trait shared by Britain, to say that the NSDAP was Socialist in name only.

But once again that is not socialism. Social programs, social safety net is a liberal ideology, it is not socialism.
To be socialist he would have to have been supporting worker ownership. Socialism is NOT a form of government, it is an economic system.

Nationalisation is not socialism. Britain has never been socialist. So you have no point.

Four of the most effectual leaders of the 20th century and all architects of various permutations of the Socialist state are all wrong in favour of Anok's pet fringe mechanism of "Social anarchism" as being the correct and only definition?

What those so called leaders did was not socialism, it was authority using socialist terms for their own agenda.

The original socialists who were the actual architects of it, people you have probably never heard of, is what I use. People like Robert Owen who was one of the founder of socialism and the cooperative movement, because socialism is worker ownership, not despot governments.

Serious question, did your education in political theory came from the same school as your education in classical physics? (meaning if you cant dazzle with brilliance just make some stuff up?)

Huh? I don't make stuff up, everything I say can be checked. I supply links and quotes. I have been a socialist for over 30 years. I went to a good school for engineering. Has the thought ever crossed your mind that you might actually be wrong? To find the truth you have to dig, not just accept the first blog you can find that agrees with what you think. The net is full of BS, and you have to have some background in the subject to know what is truth. I was reading socialist and anarchist literature before the net was even heard of. I hung out with socialists who had been in Spain before WWII.

In closing, extra credit points if you can tell us what were Joseph Stalin's views on Anarchists?

Stalin threw anarchists in the gulag. Stalin was an authoritarian. He twisted Marxist ideology for his own agenda. The Anarchist supported the Bolsheviks in the begging but turned against them at the end because they were statist, right-wing not left-wing.

I have tried to explain this but it gets ignored, there is the left-wing of the working class that got started in the early 1800's with industrial workers. Then there is the "left" of the state, authority who was simply trying to maintain it's control. The true left is of the working class, those who were revolting against the authority of the state. To understand that you need to read a lot of history, because it's not all explained in one place.

I believe most self proclaimed liberals are actually libertarians and if conservatives who side with Jesus and the teaching of the New testament should actually be liberal.

Conservative, even the definition of the word is someone against change. But the world we live in now, all the things a person loves (and hates) is the result of change.

Change is not always good. For instance, the destruction of the American family, coke 2, and Ashton Kutcher on Two and a Half men.

As someone who despises both parties and considers myself an 'outsider' in that regard...

I find it incredible how both sides criticize each other for the same exact things. It is like looking into a mirror. I will hear a right-winger going crazy over something specific the left does only to take part in the same irrational behavior moments later, and vice versa, of course.

And they are ALWAYS completely oblivious to it.

reply to post by Jordan River


Kinda joking...I think Unions have their place.

But they need to learn their limits as well in todays age.

Unions are essential.

If it wasn't for unions you'd have no weekends, no forty hour week, no holidays, no overtime pay, no health care, no safety, no age limit for labour, etc.

People have got so naive about capitalism because we have never seen what it can do when it is left to it's own devises. Just imagine what it was like in a factory in 1840 because that is how it would be. But I would guess most ATS members are not factory workers so this probably make no sense?

Originally posted by Jordan River
Yup, political war here we go. Flamers and all types. Obama haters.

In a nut shell. I dislike the Right wing, the GOP, the rep... Reasoning is pretty darn clear. I live in michigan, auto industry blue collar people. Were not the 1%. and were not people supporting the 1%, pretty sure Rightys do. Obama, yeah not at all what he was crack up to be, but better than some guy hanging out with his buddies taking a picture with money hanging out of his pocket. Interesting, Right wing thoughts are.

But...The ad I saw on TV says Romney's Dad was a Michigan auto worker too....he's just like you are.

LOL.

Originally posted by Jordan River



As much as you want to think that wanting Obama out of the office is not about Race. I wonder about that, due to most of these GOP states claiming they are not racist, yet still holding clan rallys over the weekend next to red neck joes house full of hate.

I am going to get blasted, but whatever, I am trying to be civil.
I will try to find more commonalities between both parties

the

Im from the area too and if you cant see we're in the most racist state your head is in the sand. It doesnt matter Gambino or Tocco either side is organized crime. They keep people at each others throats arguing left and right like its all encompassing.
The only entity that represents me 100% of the time is me! I have no leader!

reply to post by Jordan River


I really do not care about the right wing or the left wing I am more concerned about the head the wings are attached too because that is were the real meat of the matter is... but continue to focus on the wing instead of the head.

If it weren't for unions we'd have cheaper prices on things like groceries. The only thing unions care about these days is money, and taking money away through and dirty rotten means available.

Such as making it mandatory to be part of a union in order to get a job in some places.

And then you have to pay those union dues.

So really, unions are just another kind of scam in America that people let them get away with.

Here's a news flash for ya:

Politicians aren't really running the country.

It doesn't matter who you like, who you vote for, which party you ascribe to.

It just doesn't matter.

And the politicians we have on Capitol Hill?

It's a big joke, my friend. They're ALL scumbags.

Honestly, why would you waste your time worrying about which party to vote for? Do you not get the reality of the situation?

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by Snoopy1978

 

It would be pointless to respond your post as it is not clear what definition of conservative you were using.

When I use the term I generally mean it to mean folks who believe in limited government. In that regard, government wouldn't be largely in your business...and it wouldn't be in your bedroom.

I call myself a conservative, and I don't recognize anything about myself in your post.

If that's the only trait you have from conservatism, then the others are what?

LOL You're a closet liberal.

Originally posted by Jordan River
Yup, political war here we go. Flamers and all types. Obama haters.

In a nut shell. I dislike the Right wing, the GOP, the rep... Reasoning is pretty darn clear. I live in michigan, auto industry blue collar people. Were not the 1%. and were not people supporting the 1%, pretty sure Rightys do. Obama, yeah not at all what he was crack up to be, but better than some guy hanging out with his buddies taking a picture with money hanging out of his pocket. Interesting, Right wing thoughts are.

Again, yes Obama is no saving Messiah, Which gets to my other point. Would Jesus be for gay bashing, none rich taxing. Or with a group that "claims": (talking about dems) that they support the middle class. Yes Obama has helped the middle class a lot lately, i'm thinking health care, single mothers, mortgage etc.


As much as you want to think that wanting Obama out of the office is not about Race. I wonder about that, due to most of these GOP states claiming they are not racist, yet still holding clan rallys over the weekend next to red neck joes house full of hate.

I am going to get blasted, but whatever, I am trying to be civil.
I will try to find more commonalities between both parties

It's hard to me to imagine Jesus supporting raising taxes on anyone. I think He would support voluntary charity though. As far as gay bashing, I believe He refused to bash tax collectors and adulterers, which were the lowest of the low in his day. On the other hand, I don't think He would advocate homosexual behavior.

And as far as race, I'm fairly certain all white supremacists want Obama out of office. I'm also fairly certain that most people who want Obama out of office are not white supremacists...

I don't like either side, really, but I think obama is an idiot, For a lot of reasons, but especially for what he's done to my state(Wv). My state made him look like a fool when they would rather vote for an incarcerated criminal than him. It was public humiliation directed at him for what he has done to jobs here and what he said about rural people 'clinging onto guns and religion'. About 50% of this country is 'rural people'. We're in every state. He has no clue. I think our power companies need to turn off the switch for 1 hour a day from here on out, so that they understand how important coal is and where their energy comes from. They don't even have an alternative set up even if they dropped coal today!!

On another note, I was watching The Daily Show(which I never watch) the night before last, and there was a guy interviewing people at the DNC, about who's 'welcome in their party' and I have never seen or heard such racism/hate speech towards rural people. They said they even invited the redneck freaks and were calling the tea party "toothless gun shootin drunk hillbillies", talking with a 'country accent', and many more remarks such as this. They were also talking about how anyone who believes in god is stupid and cannot coprehend a scientific mind.(HOPEFULLY SOMEONE COULD PLEASE POST A LINK).
There's people like this on the other side too. They wouldn't want to do this within earshot of me or most people I know. zero tolerence with racism against my people. They sure as hell don't like it when anyone says anything remotely close, to what they said, about jews, blacks, or any other non-white person. #FACT: These politicians do not control anything anyway, the zionists do.

This is exactly why I feel the way I do about politicians and some city people. NOT ALL, but some. That's why I believe that a civil war could be sparked with the right situation, because most people I know have had it with all of them and talk openly in public about things that you'd never hear people talk about in public here. It's a sign of what's coming. And people are stock-piling guns and ammo by the loads. Gun powder, reloads, food, medical supplies---the list goes on and on. There's something in the air and it's about to unfold. Just my opinion.

reply to post by EvilSadamClone


This is a false scenario, unionization, in reality does not effect pricing all that, much if at all. Pricing is complex and there could be hundreds of variables that influence. Besides, I could just as easily say that groceries would be cheaper if we didn't have to pay for such a huge management bureaucracy and we just had a system where employees all had shared ownership and got rid of all the high paid / multimillion dollar salaried executives. Sure some companies complain about unions, companies complain about having to pay people fairly and abide by the law...it's more based in politics than it is based in reality. Employers would steal the land beneath your feet if they knew they could get away with it. That's why so many of them move overseas, because they can get away with paying their employees (children in some cases) only pennies a day, and not have to worry about things like safety, polluting the environment, getting caught for tax evasion, stealing other people's private property and natural resources, and other such "niceties".

Besides there are many examples from the movement in South America ("Worker Run Businesses Flourish in Argentina") where workers got fed up with being paid unlivable wages and working under piss poor conditions (while management/owners paid themselves outrageous salaries, often at the expense of the overall health of the business) So, many workers have been organizing and forming their own companies with shared ownership. They are actually able to produce better quality products at the same prices than their former companies all while making livable wages many times more than what they were making... and all under vastly improved conditions (safety, health, environmental, etc.).

You really need to learn about the history of labor in this country before you go off making blanket statements like "unions drive up prices". and "unions are a scam".

And for the record, Supreme Court [NLRV v. GM] has already ruled that an employer cannot force you to join a union as a requirement of employment, in some cases you may be required to pay a fee that covers "employer finance" costs only, such as the cost of contract negotiation and administration of benefits. An employer cannot compel you to pay dues to a union for use of things like organizing, political speech, etc...in instances where you don't join, you would still be covered under the negotiated contract, in other words, you would still have access to the same health insurance benefits, vacation time, sick leave, etc.

Unions serve a purpose. I was part of a union for awhile. There are things about my union that I did not like and certain criticisms that I share about unions (i.e. corruption is possible in any situation where there is potential for power and abuse of that power). Rather than unions, shared worker ownership/co-ops would be the better solution. The reason why unions were necessary in this country is because the single worker as an individual doesn't stand a chance negotiating against the money and political power of the employer/oligarchs. So individual employees organized as a check on the power abuses of the employers/plutocracy. For all your complaining about unions I'm willing to bet that you would not last so much as a day under the work conditions prior to organized labor in America.

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
If it weren't for unions we'd have cheaper prices on things like groceries. The only thing unions care about these days is money, and taking money away through and dirty rotten means available.

What do you think the capitalists the unions protect the workers from care about? Their workers? Hell no, money, making profit.

Such as making it mandatory to be part of a union in order to get a job in some places.

And then you have to pay those union dues.

So really, unions are just another kind of scam in America that people let them get away with.

Do you expect unions to work for free?

You arguments against unions are rather silly mate. What would you do if they took your weekends away? Made you work overtime for no extra pay?

Why are people so naive about what goes on in industry? Probably because you've never worked in industry? Have no sense of labour history?

If It Wasn't For The Unions

(Irish trad / Matt McGinn)

Toora loora loora loo
I'll tell you something awfu' true
Wouldn't have your telly the noo
If it wasn't for the union

I had a boss in Aberdeen
The nicest fella that ever was seen
He must have thought me helluva green
Before I joined the union

I had a boss named Allardyce
He was really helluva nice
Except for the way he loaded the dice
Before I joined the union

A pal of mine has bought a car
A second-handed Jaguar
He wouldn't hae travelled half as far
If it wasn't for the union

The bosses they were doing fine
Little children working down the mine
They'd have them on the assembly lines
If it wasn't for the union

So men and women all agree
It's time to rise up off your knee
And raise the banner of unity
Forward with the union

Do you expect unions to work for free?

There is no difference between the unions and the capitalists. They all want profit and will use any dirty trick to get it.

You can insult me and berate me all you want, but that'll just show me you're just part of the problem because all you are is a shill for the unions and can't think for yourself.

And I'll repeat what I said: unions are just another kind of scam artist trying to make a profit. They don't care a damned thing for the workers either, they just want the money for themselves

They are not the good guys you portray them to be.

Sorry, you can say I'm being silly all you want to, but that's the honest truth.

I feel sorry for the workers being caught in between the two criminal groups like that.

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
There is no difference between the unions and the capitalists. They all want profit and will use any dirty trick to get it.

Yes there is, the union is a service for the worker, the capitalist exploits the worker. The union protects workers rights, and lobbies on their behalf etc. Unions do not make profit, it actually does cost money to run a union.

You can insult me and berate me all you want, but that'll just show me you're just part of the problem because all you are is a shill for the unions and can't think for yourself.

Sorry if you think I am insulting you. I'm a shill for the unions now? I'm not even a member of a union.

Can't you defend your position with any facts? All you have given me is insults.

And I'll repeat what I said: unions are just another kind of scam artist trying to make a profit. They don't care a damned thing for the workers either, they just want the money for themselves

That is just your uninformed opinion. You have no idea of what unions do, obviously.

Do you think it's right that Chinese workers are forced to work 65 hour weeks, have to sleep on the factory floor, have no health and safety, are payed very low? That's what happens when you don't have unions.

They are not the good guys you portray them to be.

Sorry, you can say I'm being silly all you want to, but that's the honest truth.

I feel sorry for the workers being caught in between the two criminal groups like that.

Well I never said they were the 'good guys', are we in high school or something? Unions are essential for the worker, as history proves. I would guess you are not an industrial worker? Or even care about what I say?

The honest truth? Who's truth? You still haven't provided a good argument against unions.

Two criminal groups? So you admit the capitalists are criminals? So what is the answer? Worker ownership!

OK, First off let me be clear, all parties are scum, and I do mean ALL of them, but the reason I hate the GOP, or at least hate them in the collective, is because they are such blatant hypocrites, and their groupies, i.e., their voting base, is too damn biased to see it, or too dumb to admit it. All of them run on a platform of being Christian, yet everyone of them are war mongers who absolutely loathe helping those that need help the most. Please show me where Jesus said it's OK to kill your fellow man and/or take food from those that don't have it to give to those who have too much, I would love to see that passage.

At least the Democrats throw a scrap to those in need, the republicans, and all you "Tea Partiers, Libertarians and such, ARE Republican, want to take that scrap away and give it to someone who already has filet mignon

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
reply to post by loam

 

Conservatives are manipulated by their fear of change and social progress. Just like cornered, frightened animals, conservatives tend to lash out in violence at anything that feels to be a threat be it real or manufactured. Guided mainly by primal instinct and superstition, these individuals are ready to be controlled and used if promised safety and minor personal gain.

Conservatives are a HUGE part of the problem.

Simple question:
Know any? Drink beer with any? fishing? hunting shack buddies maybe??????
I love it when "Libbys" tell me with no uncertain authority what I believe and what I do when nobody is watching....
Don't feel bad I don't hang out with any of "you guys" either.but I know from showing up here I don't want to ..
I submit the above post is all patently b.s.and highly insulting ;don't expect a cold one set aside for you anytimesoon...
Thanks for driving that"dividing wedge"just that much deeper.