Socialism is the best ideology

Originally posted by polarwarrior

Originally posted by Propulsion

“Capitalism has failed”

If it were not for capitalism, you surely wouldn’t be enjoying the comforts of b!tching on your computer about how everyone else is wrong, and you are right!

If you hate capitalism so much, I suggest you get rid of everything capitalism has provided for you. I have a feeling you won’t be doing that any time soon. And in saying so, I will end by saying that you’re nothing but a hypocrite.

Actually that was science and engineering which gave us the computer.

Capitalism just introduced planned obsolescence, so we would need to replace them more often and the companies would make more money. One example is that some printers have a chip in them which when you've reached a set number of prints it disables the printer and you have to go out to buy a new one. The more people buy stuff and the quicker they need to throw it out again - the better capitalism does. Hence you get consumerist culture & increased damage to the environment. They also hold back software so they can release a new version each year or so - even if they could release all they got straight away they don't because they want you to keep having to update it - means more $$ for the corporations like Microsoft.

In addition to making them break easier, capitalism also makes them less affordable. In 2011, 496 billion dollars was spent on adverting, this has now well passed the half trillion mark. Most ads tell us little about the specification of the product and just annoy us, but we pay for them in the cost of our computers. Other wastes include legal costs, other marketing, lobbying, business admin and of course multimillion dollar ceo bonuses - you pay for all of these when you buy a computer in capitalism even though stuff like lobbying does nothing at all to make your computer better.

edit on 20/5/13 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)

Nonsense. Look at the cost and capabilities of an Apple II in the 1980's and look at the cost and capabilities of any contemporary desktop. It was free market capitalism and competition that increased the capabilities and decreased the cost of the home computer.

Originally posted by Masterjaden
The reason you don't see true marxist or true communist governments is that they CANNOT exist due to the human frailty condition.

As long as there is ONE SINGLE human that will subjugate others, you cannot have the Eutopia on paper that is Communism.

The best realistic govt that you can have is that envisioned by the US's founding fathers. Where no one should be able to do anything, even a large group of someones, that negatively affects the sovereignty of other individuals. You have the natural rights of free speech, assembly, redress of grievances, practice of religion, right against unreasonable search and seizure and the right to bear arms and protect all of those other rights from those that would subjugate you.

However, as has been the case with America, you see the ugly head of those who would oppress and subjugate rearing their ugly head and trying to make even that best government unmaintainable.

The only way to ensure that it IS retained is to get those lazy manipulable fools off their sorry asses and willing to get out their and fight to retain their liberties and rights and freedoms. Without that willingness, we can expect for things to always drift toward fascism, but at least with a republic where inalienable rights are acknowledged, it becomes more difficult for fascism to rear its ugly head, it is almost immediate in socialist and communist states.

Jaden

edit on 19-5-2013 by Masterjaden because: (no reason given)

Communists and facists/nazis are NOT the ones trying to subjugate others for evil purposes. The ultra-rich capitalist class which people like you turn a blind eye to and mislabel as "facists". You don't even know what a facist is let alone anything else. People parrot things so that they become generic and meaningless. The true value of definitions get lost.

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” ― Margaret Thatcher

I'm going to agree with the Iron Lady.

Originally posted by Carreau

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” ― Margaret Thatcher

I'm going to agree with the Iron Lady.

Any system that as officials working for it and builds infrastructure etc. relies on 'the other people's money'. Shifting this from 'government' to 'corporations' does not change that, it are merely other people that get your money. And, we hope, you'll get the proper infrastructure and facilities in return. It can be hotly debated which of the 2 systems yields the best results: I believe the quality of USSR hospitals, their Universities and their metro system was very good.

Another argument I found quite funny was that socialism (or 'communism' as fearful Americans used to label it back in the good old days of mcCartyism) is said not to be able to create scientific advancement.

Well, they were the first to launch a satellite, were the first to have a manned space station. Interlaced video was a 'communist' invention, as was the light emitting diode - in 1927! - and the military robot. The first drum-machine too, and underwater welding, the drag-chute, the maser and a large part of lasers, carbon nanotubes, the tokamak, the ICBM, the first mobile phone, the re-entry capsule, the anti-ballistic missile, first human spaceflight, 3D holography, the plasma propulsion engine, the space toilet (...), Kirov class battlecruisers, the helicopter ejection seat (think of that..) and, of course, the Tetris computer game. And that is only a selection of the totally unimportant stuff these blasted commies invented..

A big difference between 'sovjet' thinking and 'american' thinking was the total and utter no-nonsense style of the sovjets. Both parties had to face the problem how to write in an environment without gravity. They both solved the problem: americans invented a complex system to pump ink to the point of a ballpoint (the papermate), the commies used pencils

Folks, I'm not in favour of a system - whatever system - that oppresses it's citizens. And a lot of Russian citizens were mistreated by the commies. But to state that they were unable to contribute to scientific development is .. er.. not entirely true..

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Nonsense.

That's easy to say but can you back it up, got some proof planned obsolescence doesn't exist?

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Look at the cost and capabilities of an Apple II in the 1980's and look at the cost and capabilities of any contemporary desktop. It was free market capitalism and competition that increased the capabilities and decreased the cost of the home computer.

When technology advances it becomes cheaper, everyone knows this, we find better ways of doing things and we develop more efficient manufacturing techniques - it's all due to technological advancement. If it weren't for all the useless costs in computer businesses like marketing, lobbying, legal, ceo bonuses etc. which are used to "compete" then socialism could make them waaaay cheaper. When you take all these costs into account you realize how much of a myth it is that capitalism is more efficient, and due to all these costs they are forced to make saving elsewhere - usually workers wages and conditions - which is why the Apple buildings have suicide nets, why sweatshops are rampant in this world and why some Americans work for 5$/hr, and why all the US manufacturing is going overseas. Making working conditions so bad that you have to install suicide nets is not a great way to be "efficient" imo, try getting rid of the capitalist aspects - like the 496 billion spent on advertising.

reply to post by LABTECH767


I think I should explain myself here.

Although I believe in the core philosophies of National Socialism, I do not blatantly show my hate as do groups like Aryan Nations and Skinheads. How I interpret it that I want to strive to be that perfect being that was oft-talked about in the literature. I can tolerate those who in my beliefs would be "inferior", but I kind of view them more in a condescending light ie: "How cute, they can do x".

It's a very hairy subject, I know, so that is why I usually keep my political beliefs to myself. But since the topic came up, I had to offer my two cents.

On the subject of socialism though, if we could follow a blended system of socialism with a dash of capitalism like you see in European countries and Venezuela, I'm sure it could be near perfect society.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by fadedface

 

Capitalism factors in human greed and corruption which is why it is the prevalent political ideology in the world today.

Socialism factors in human greed and corruption which is why it is the prevalent political ideology in the world today.

Fixed for accuracy take a good look at the record debt all 'socialist' policies created.

When people are all consumed with money, and corporate products, but mandated by government proxy.

Capitalism doesn't exist.

Oh ya, funny how you can make anybody believe in something completely fallacious and false and all you have to do it drum it into there head generation after generation. But ya capitalism does not exist, or at least it exists just as much as socialism exists, which is just saying that it is just the newest fad, kind of like communism was the newest fad back in pre war and post war Europe and China.

It is just the mentality of the base populous ie human nature, and greed is one of the foremost natures humans are capable of. But in reality it is all the same thing. Even when the US was going strong it never really was a fully capitalistic nation, it just had an influx from the old world which allowed it to spreed those ideas and creations which were created by the dreaded commies and others, after all the US government and army did not spend all that $$ getting all those scientist from the Nazis and communist Russia for nothing, most if not all of the creations and inventions that gave it its power was created and had its roots by and in the very things and systems which they say stifle creation and invention, communism and socialism war torn Germany and Russia mostly.

Funny part is if all of Europe would of put behind them there pointless bickering America would never have gotten anywhere to its apex that it is today, and to day it would still be that backwards place were its good to set up shop do to the cheep labor....See how things work, it would of been China and China and Europe would of been USA, and all the cheep Chinese made things would of been made in America. Though give it a bit of time and things will head in those directions again. Greed eventually has a habit of eating itself up. History does have a habit of repeating itself. And its like I always say, if there is one thing you can learn from history is that people do not really learn from history.

If you look pretty much everything that was created in the old world down to the bombs they used in ww1 and ww2 was brought over and perfected in the good ol US of A. Its just an ongoing thing, just like today you see things out-flowing to different places...Do you wonder what they will call there system and ism when all that was created here is put in practice and perfected somewhere else. Give it a few generations and they will be arguing about how capitalists killed millions during the corporate proxy wars for resources in the outset of the technological age. After all need that lithium for that PC your using eh?

The system has always been the same, only its name, labels and banners have changed. And so we have all these capitalists getting bailed out by there socialistic networks. One hand washes the other, while pointing fingers and blame on yet another set of hands. Humanity, what a barrel of laugh's. As funny as a barrel of monkeys.

Communism in Russia was a Rothschild experiment engineered at the behest of the British empire. I can say this with confidence.

The Russian kind of communism was to serve the British empire by converting masses of people into non-questioning slaves. They have always been able to manipulate the rulers so communism basically created slave-countries for the empire.

The experiment failed largely due to development of nationalism and dynamics of second world war which weakened the empire greatly.

Originally posted by Carreau

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” ― Margaret Thatcher

I'm going to agree with the Iron Lady.

Thatcher and Reagan were the epitomy of global evil and you mistakenly worship such losers. If you knew how much money some families have managed to accumulate I think you would not be so naive. The reason governments have to borrow more and more, thus creating unsustainable debt, is because the billionares and trillionares(yes they exist) are smart enough to escape paying what they should, thus there is no redistribution of wealth to everyone else, and they use that money to buy influence at all levels of government.

What can someone do with a few trillion dollars for himself/herself regardless how they earned it? To acquire more trillions of dollars and to acquire more influence. It is the perpetual cycle of greed!

I have plenty of respect for people who started small scale and rose to medium scale business. But once you reach a certain level the ptb will not allow you to rise higher unless you meet their criteria of doing business, and trust me these folks are as rotten as satan to put it mildely.

With REAL SOCIALISM the government issues its own money! It does NOT BORROW from a private central bank whether it is called the federal reserve or the european central bank. What we had in europe was socialism WITHIN CAPITALISM and it was bound to fail from the beginning. Of course the evil pricks never disclose it to anyone until the government is getting ready to fail!

Bottom line is that socialism have always led to totalitarianism because it centralizes too much power to a few men to determine what is best for the collective.

Power corrupts, and with that more and more power get centralizes until someone decides to seize the throne.

Socialism doesn't work in the real world because evil men are attracted to government and eventually will be successful in hijacking it. Once they have the power they will never let go of it.

It would only work if government is ran by angels. But in the real world men are easily corruptible, even when it starts out good, it will eventually be hijack. History has proven this over and over again. Just look at Rome as an example.

This is the reason why the founders wanted America to have a limited government that way no one can consolidate too much power. They would have too much competition to be able to control everything.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


You assume too much I do not worship anyone. Name me some Trillionaires. And that long winded rant has nothing to do with me. So go sell crazy somewhere else.

Originally posted by Carreau
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

You assume too much I do not worship anyone. Name me some Trillionaires. And that long winded rant has nothing to do with me. So go sell crazy somewhere else.

There was nothing crazy about what i said. I am sorry if you are too brainwashed or lack reading comprehension. I won't repeat the same post twice either cause its pointless!

Originally posted by amfirst1
Bottom line is that socialism have always led to totalitarianism because it centralizes too much power to a few men to determine what is best for the collective.

Power corrupts, and with that more and more power get centralizes until someone decides to seize the throne.

Socialism doesn't work in the real world because evil men are attracted to government and eventually will be successful in hijacking it. Once they have the power they will never let go of it.

It would only work if government is ran by angels. But in the real world men are easily corruptible, even when it starts out good, it will eventually be hijack. History has proven this over and over again. Just look at Rome as an example.

This is the reason why the founders wanted America to have a limited government that way no one can consolidate too much power. They would have too much competition to be able to control everything.

The constitution can have all the merit in the world but money is what corrupts capitalism. Companies eventually get big enough to create monopolies in each business sector. It does not happen overnight, but eventually it does happen.

Coca-Cola in soft drinks, Microsoft in computer software, Cisco in computer networks, General Motors/Ford/Chrysler in automobiles, a few companies in big pharma, a few companies in insurance, a few companies in banking, etc.

"Money talks and BS walks" is a common saying. "Always follow the money" is another common saying. These are practical lessons in life we all learn, either the easy way or the hard way.

Originally posted by TheToastmanCometh
reply to post by LABTECH767

 

Although I believe in the core philosophies of National Socialism,

What are these core philosophies? I know a bit about German National Socialism, and that did not work out really well - to say the least. Are you refering to Nazism, or some other form of National Socialism (and if so, which, and what are these core philosophies?)

I do not blatantly show my hate as do groups like Aryan Nations and Skinheads. How I interpret it that I want to strive to be that perfect being that was oft-talked about in the literature. I can tolerate those who in my beliefs would be "inferior", but I kind of view them more in a condescending light ie: "How cute, they can do x".

If you feel the need to look down on others, simply climb a high building.

It's a very hairy subject, I know, so that is why I usually keep my political beliefs to myself. But since the topic came up, I had to offer my two cents.

Well, you said you were fond of the core philosophies of national socialism. What then are these core philosophies, in your opinion?

On the subject of socialism though, if we could follow a blended system of socialism with a dash of capitalism like you see in European countries and Venezuela, I'm sure it could be near perfect society.

Like the Iargan society.. might work.

Originally posted by Carreau
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

You assume too much I do not worship anyone. Name me some Trillionaires. And that long winded rant has nothing to do with me. So go sell crazy somewhere else.

So, you worship trillionaires?

Originally posted by amfirst1
Bottom line is that socialism have always led to totalitarianism because it centralizes too much power to a few men to determine what is best for the collective.

That is an entirely different discussion, of course. Neither socialism nor capitalism can work if too few man have all the power. In the end you'll have dicatorship. Remember for example that great CAPITALIST dictator - Saddam Houssein..

Originally posted by ForteanOrg

What are these core philosophies? I know a bit about German National Socialism, and that did not work out really well - to say the least. Are you refering to Nazism, or some other form of National Socialism (and if so, which, and what are these core philosophies?)

National Socialism was very popular during its day because it brought down monarchies and gave people a sense of hope. It combines nationalism and socialism. Nationalism is not necessarily imperialism, it can simply imply protectionism of the economy.

Todays capitalism is more imperialistic than national socialism of its day, but people have been brainwashed to accept capitalism is the only way with a very closed minded approach. Nazism and Facism in actuality was the same thing, but in some countries meant a strong sense of imperialism to gain colonies from the traditional european powers.

Spain, Portugal, Roumania, Turkey, Austria, Switzerland, etc were all national socialists but they were NOT imperialists like italy and germany were. They offered silent support one could say.

Well, you said you were fond of the core philosophies of national socialism. What then are these core philosophies, in your opinion?

I would say the opposite of international capitalism. We have international capitalism today and its not workng out so dandy. We also have lots of NATO imperialism run out of american headquarters in washington.



.

I think socialism is more like a fad that happened to catch on rather than a coherent ideology. It grew into a diverse movement, some of its streams may even approach something good. Not the one in the OP tough. Lets leave that failed experiment in 20th century while social capitalist world marches on..

Originally posted by polarwarrior

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Nonsense.

That's easy to say but can you back it up, got some proof planned obsolescence doesn't exist?

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Look at the cost and capabilities of an Apple II in the 1980's and look at the cost and capabilities of any contemporary desktop. It was free market capitalism and competition that increased the capabilities and decreased the cost of the home computer.

When technology advances it becomes cheaper, everyone knows this, we find better ways of doing things and we develop more efficient manufacturing techniques - it's all due to technological advancement. If it weren't for all the useless costs in computer businesses like marketing, lobbying, legal, ceo bonuses etc. which are used to "compete" then socialism could make them waaaay cheaper. When you take all these costs into account you realize how much of a myth it is that capitalism is more efficient, and due to all these costs they are forced to make saving elsewhere - usually workers wages and conditions - which is why the Apple buildings have suicide nets, why sweatshops are rampant in this world and why some Americans work for 5$/hr, and why all the US manufacturing is going overseas. Making working conditions so bad that you have to install suicide nets is not a great way to be "efficient" imo, try getting rid of the capitalist aspects - like the 496 billion spent on advertising.

edit on 20/5/13 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)

Logical fallicy: proving a negative. Prove that planned obsolescence does exist.

Capitalism is and has been the most efficient way to provide goods and services to the most at the least cost.

American corporations are going overseas because the government, run by socialists, increases the cost of doing business through regulation and taxation.

And in the great soviet and maoist workers paradises, people died by the millions.

Socialism is great if you like shortages and only having the choice of a single type of item. Capitalism and competition gives you the variety of goods and services you have today.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Logical fallicy: proving a negative. Prove that planned obsolescence does exist.

I would say lots of things break down much faster than what they should. It does not help the capitalist class to make good items that last a long time because in the long run it hampers sales. I can find motive in their decision making process, but it does not necessarily imply its true either.

Capitalism is and has been the most efficient way to provide goods and services to the most at the least cost.

If you mean by destroying unions and encouraging illegals by the truckload, then YES it is very efficient. But I don't think you and the other international capitalists want to discuss that.

American corporations are going overseas because the government, run by socialists, increases the cost of doing business through regulation and taxation.

No they are liberals who love regulating and taxing the hell out of everything middle class. Rich and poor have always gotten a free ride so to speak. It would have infinitely better to cut down on taxation rates(personal and corporate) and then apply tariffs like they did in the old days. Then proceed to deregulate meaningless stuff. I would rather have quality over quantity approach.

And in the great soviet and maoist workers paradises, people died by the millions.

They were butchers? Or was it the capitalist class controlling the UN putting sanctions and embargoes on communist nations? Cuba could not even export cigars and everyone knows this. I agree communism sucks but lets focus on the real reasons rather than propagada. The real reason was lack of initiative from the workers other than going to jail if you overdid it in the lazy department.

Socialism is great if you like shortages and only having the choice of a single type of item. Capitalism and competition gives you the variety of goods and services you have today.

You should say communism to distinct it from socialism. Yes and no though to your statement. Yes capitalism encourages diversity and competition BUT only during its early stages of development, then monopolies form and quaility goes down as well as prices going up.