CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Socialism thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Socialism thread - Page 3

post #101 of 124
From Wikipedia

Quote:
Individualist anarchism comprises several traditions which hold that "individual conscience and the pursuit of self-interest should not be constrained by any collective body or public authority." Individualist anarchism is supportive of property being held privately, unlike the social/socialist/collectivist/communitarian wing which advocates common ownership
I guess it just depends on what kind of anarchist you are.
post #102 of 124
Are the Free Republicers becoming proto-anarcho syndiclists to thwart a socialist?
post #103 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan View Post
As always with these big ideas like Anarchy, Socialism, Communism, Captitalism, etc. there is no clear cut text book definition for them.

But Anarchy is pretty much the opposite of selfishness. Basicly it calls upon the people to set up their order without a central authority and government and seize responsibility upon their own. The absence of a central authority does not equal the pursuit of selfish goals. Rather people are urged to put the needs of many before the needs of a few. Spock would aproove.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheShadows View Post
From Wikipedia
I guess it just depends on what kind of anarchist you are.
From the same article:
Quote:
There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive
Quote:
Social anarchism is one of two different broad categories of anarchism, the other category being individualist anarchism. The term social anarchism is often used to identify communitarian forms of anarchism that emphasize cooperation and mutual aid. Social anarchism includes anarcho-collectivism, anarcho-communism, Libertarian socialism, anarcho-syndicalism, social ecology and sometimes mutualism.Edit: These are a hell lot of -isms.
Like I said above there is no clear cut textbook definition. It is not easy to argue in a few sentences about these big ideas. Especially in your second language. But without some shades of grey arguments are futile.
post #104 of 124
I am kind of interested in how many Americans view European nations as Third World countries.
post #105 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
I am kind of interested in how many Americans view European nations as Third World countries.
Tzu does apparently.
post #106 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
I am kind of interested in how many Americans view European nations as Third World countries.
Well my guess is that at least 20 European nations view the US as a Third World country, at least in some regards.
post #107 of 124
In response to Devin's original post; Florida is even better since Charlie Christ became Governor (read it in the Miami Herald, don't have a link) and hell, Florida isn't even a red state anymore! I've lived in Florida my entire life and over the past twenty years it's leaned further and further right the the point of absurdity, so to see it go blue was the surprise of a lifetime.
post #108 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
I am kind of interested in how many Americans view European nations as Third World countries.
Just the ones with monster problems - parts of Transylvania, that village Frankenstein was always terrorizing.

I think people might be confusing "rural" with "poor".
post #109 of 124
Canada may have universal health care, but it is far behind the more socialist European nations.

We have a conservative government voted in by the same people who hate Bush; Obama's win is celebrated, especially by baby boomers who recall the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. - but many who wax poetically about a black man holding office will just as soon be racist to aboriginals and french people. My province of Manitoba is actually a quite racist place, and we have the NDP as our provincial government - the second-most liberal party next to Green (and, er, the Marxist party that shows up occasionally, which is impressive...).

But there is a fair amount of envy towards America, at least where I live. It seems we have the same party just because we have lower taxes, and higher military spending than before. Not good.
post #110 of 124
The Green party isn't that Liberal, beyond environmental issues. And I know the prairies are fucked up (my condolences for you having to live there), but Canada's still #4 on the HDI and way up there in terms of quality of life.

Also, our system of government protects the conservative party from doing too much damage.
post #111 of 124
Well, I probably have a skewed view from being in Winnipeg for most of my life. But regarding the federal government, while the conservatives are a minority - I can't help but fret if now, depending on what Obama does, is a sign of the states actually becoming more progressive than canada, which I still can't see as much more progressive than the states overall, except for a few cities and medicare. There's so much empty space spotted with goddamn villages in canada. Essentially, I am paranoid. And no, I don't think Obama will bring -great- change to the states. To me, he is a reasonable, disciplined yet likable guy who plays politics by the rules; regarding his stance on Kyoto, I worry we'll return to wishing Al Gore was president, at least for that issue.

The only way gay marriage will be legal everywhere, and abortion an option for women everywhere, is when we have a leader who will roughly say, "Fuck this. These are human rights we're talking about." But the civil rights movement is weak of late. Obama as president is a step in the right direction, but I doubt we're upon the leader who won't resort to populist tactics just because, it seems, many people are opposed to those human rights.

And, while I'm canadian, I say we because the states has had quite a bit of influence, from marijuana laws to those other issues. If it's legal in america, there is no way it would be illegal in canada.
post #112 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
If it's legal in america, there is no way it would be illegal in canada.
Gun control.
post #113 of 124
Ah shite. You're right.
post #114 of 124
Wait...you guys aren't allowed to have guns?

BTW, Gun Control laws change greatly between states. It's pretty hard to get a gun in NJ (legally), but in Texas I hear you can pretty much just walk in and buy one.
post #115 of 124
The law is quite strict with guns. Though it is possible to have them...it's not like some states.

EDIT: Hmm, the more I look into it, the more gun control seems to be an almost null issue in this discussion, if you exclude texas...the texas of canada is alberta, but even still it isn't quite so rife with guns...though I wonder how many have them illegally, as albertans i knew in my mid-teens would kill time by shooting their shotguns at tin cans...
post #116 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
The law is quite strict with guns. Though it is possible to have them...it's not like some states.
We at least have the proportions correct -- more pot and fewer handguns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
Hmm, the more I look into it, the more gun control seems to be an almost null issue in this discussion, if you exclude Texas...
I'm not sure what you mean here -- for example, Canada has no right to concealed carry.

Some people consider this as one the pinnacles of the "nanny state" -- I'm nowhere near that kind of nuts ...
post #117 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunwukong View Post
I'm not sure what you mean here -- for example, Canada has no right to concealed carry.
The only people that can legally carry concealed weapons here are cops, ex-cops, or people with serious connections.
post #118 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheShadows View Post
The only people that can legally carry concealed weapons here are cops, ex-cops, or people with serious connections.
FWIW, Wikipedia has an article on concealed carry in the states, which includes this animated map.
post #119 of 124
And there's only one state with unrestricted concealed handgun access, and that's New Hampshire. Which makes sense, since their state motto is "Live Free or Die."

Granted, the amount of states that "Shall issue" a concealed weapons license has grown since 1986.
post #120 of 124
This and this also says that Vermont and Alaska, respectively, are also no permit concealed carry states -- obviously guarding against us pot-smuggling, anti-gun Canucks.

Or maybe to fire a few shots off the bow of Mother Russia?
post #121 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunwukong View Post
I'm not sure what you mean here -- for example, Canada has no right to concealed carry.
Ah, I was just talking about whether or not it is possible to have a firearm in canada and the us.
post #122 of 124
I expect Alaska, but Vermont? Favored home of hippies in the Eastern US? Surprising. Still, it's a fairly rural state.

Anyway, our problem is that it's easier to get a gun illegally than legally (when I say that, I mean Jersey. Can't speak for the Country as a whole).
post #123 of 124
I have friends who live part time in Cally and Alberta, and they say it is easier to get a Concealed_carry permeate in Alberta then in California. In California we use secret service contacts to get the old Concealed_carry. In California you have to have federal government contacts to get one.
post #124 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheShadows View Post
I expect Alaska, but Vermont? Favored home of hippies in the Eastern US? Surprising. Still, it's a fairly rural state.

Anyway, our problem is that it's easier to get a gun illegally than legally (when I say that, I mean Jersey. Can't speak for the Country as a whole).
I would say for the country as a whole illegal firarms are easier to get.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Socialism thread