Socialism thread - Page 2

I just saw South Carolina on the location.

Makes a lot of sense now why you're so ass backwards.

You're a leftist cockfag(term of endearment from me don't forget) but I still love your writing and tolerate your ideas.

Real question:

Do conservative ideas seem as surreal to leftists as leftist ideas do to me? I mean, I can buy the whole, "Conservatives don't have a heart" arguments but I am talking straight out surreal. It boggles my mind that people can think some of the things that you guys think. Surreal.

Yes. You are a bastion of liberal tolerance for your blanket condemnation of people you have never met. Good on you, sir.

Man, I love this election. It's become the impetus for the truly and genuinely dumb to publicly show themselves for ease of identification.

My ignore list expands by the day.

I know this is not my fight and this was probably not aimed at me. But as an European I am curious to ask:

This whole retarded socialism debate is apparently sparked by Obamas tax proposal and the wording "spread the wealth". From what I have gathered Obamas tax plan will pretty much reinstate the taxes under Clinton. And "spread the wealth" is pretty much inherent to any use of tax money. So what is exactly surreal about this?

Not to start about health care system because this ideological charged debate is actual surreal for me from an European point of view.

Really curious.

Yup. Every one who voted McCain/Palin is free to insult and laugh at.

You're the expert on blanketing so I would defer to you but it just so happens my roots go back many, many generations in the Palmetto State mainly in Marion and Horry counties.

I spent many summers at my maternal grandparent's home in Myrtle Beach and have a great many cousins still there and in Mullins. So, in closing, let me say I don't make statements like the one I made lightly.

Well you did. Especially seeing as I am a transplant.

Oh, because you made that so fuckin' obvious. Where did you 'transplant' from?

But that doesn't even matter, since it was probably from a place of ignorance.

Remember, entitlements are bad when it's OTHER people getting them. Your entitlements are justified and necessary.*



* - that's the royal "your"

Founding fathers HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It does matter when you are the party that claims tolerance of ideas. I haven't pooh-poohed any of you lefties personally, I have simply stated my thoughts on the issue and been faced with invective and personal attacks.

Which ideas did you have in mind? And how are we supposed to know how surreal you think other ideas are?

It was mostly just a general question when you consider the differing opinions on things. While I have no problem with many of the leftists that I know and deal with on a consistent basis I generally don't understand how one could exist in the reality they tend to exist in.

Maybe it boils down to emotions over logic wherein I sometimes see the former ruling most of their decisions. They "feel" a lot more than they "think".

Perhaps that is the disconnect and where the surreality(?) comes in. I will try to come up with another issue besides the overriding one in this thread but if you could indulge me as to wealth distribution and socialism in the meantime I would be much obliged.

I have no idea how surreal you may feel various views to be, but I know that Objectivism strikes me as utterly insane. To try to deny that there are grey areas in life and that moral absolutes are hard to come by---especially in the absence of God--is pretty bizarre to me.

As for socialism, given that even a quick glance at every first world nation (US included) demonstrates conclusively that it can work, the opposition to it does seem a little weird. I don't know about "surreal", though. It's pretty clear WHY certain people have demonized it, what I don't get is why everyone else goes along with it.

I'm not sure I would say I have fallen completely into an Objectivist state at this point in my life. I can see where it enamors some people and can also understand the fault people have with its stark nature as you mentioned.

I also don't see where in history socialism has ever "worked". Sure there are amalgamated economies/philosophies that are "working" but the oppressive nature of the tax regimes needed to effect that hardly make for what I would term a good life. Consider that the poor in America are generally more well off than middle class Europeans and I would say that Socialism isn't something I would like to see run rampant through this country.

The idea that we have to hold back those running ahead so others can catch up is just plain stupid. It boils down to envy, an ugly emotion. Wealth envy, class envy; these are the tools of the Socialist and the campaign that I felt was run by Obama and why I feel he isn't the best for this country. Neither did I feel McCain was either. It is all pandering and vote buying and very little to do with Constitutional government.

Yes, I'd gathered that. But that doesn't answer my questions.

Implying that you do "think", right? See, I don't buy that. The basis of your argument is not results, but adhering to ancestor worship ("Actually that line of thinking does not jive with what the founding fathers had in mind. They were advocates of states rights and individual experiments in liberty.") I don't find that rational at all. I certainly don't find support of Bush's wars terribly rational, especially the one in Iraq.

I don't know if that's where the surrealism comes in or not, because you didn't answer my questions.

If you can't see the difference between advocating a government-run meritocracy and a statement to the effect that if the least of us do well we're all doing well, I don't know how I can help you. You already live in a mixed economy with a progressive tax system, Obama's not making drastic changes in that regard. This fuss about socialism is just the latest buzzword from the right; pay it no heed.

I'm going to make a small leap here and say that you've never actually had contact with poor people in your life.

EDIT: States' rights is a buzzword for racism, and has been since the beginning. Slaveowners were its major proponents. I'm tired of this "bu-bu-bu founding fathers!" shit.

Speaking of objectivism, the implication that your side is "logical," while the other side is emotional and irrational is total Ayn Rand bullshit. The primary problem with this view is that it fails to acknowledge the subjective nature of reality. Of course, you think your side is "logical." It's your side, and you've convinced yourself that, due to possibly pre-conceived notions that it's "correct" in some objective, universal way, it must therefore be "logical."

Capitalism, communism, socialism, whatever - they can only be judged by their efficacy, and you can't judge that independent of a specific application. What works in one country in one era may not work in another. Regardless, there's nothing inherently more "logical" about any of them than any other. There may be matters of morality attached, but let's not fool ourselves into believing that any given moral system has been constructed via pure reason, either - each appeals to an individual, at least to some degree, on the basis of empathy, greed, and other emotions.

Th...b...wha...guh...?!?!?!?

Tzu, I really, really, really urge you to do a little more research. I've vowed to be pleasant and reasonable to message board people I disagree with from here on out, so I'm not going to yell at you and castigate you, but this is really, really wrong. You need to actually talk to or listen to some people from "socialist" (or rather, more socialist) countries before you say things like this. You can start by talking to me, I'm Canadian. Our standard of life is higher (as is the case with many "socialist" European nations), our health care system is better, our educational system seems to work better on the whole. We have our problems, like any country, but you're talking like we exist in utilitarian housing and have to wait in line for four hours for bread. Our lifestyle is awfully similar to yours, except, apparently, on average, better. And that's Canada. I've been to Europe and have European friends and even family members; I have absolutely no idea where you're getting this "middle class Europeans live worse than American poor" thing from.

Yeah, no one's really commuting INTO South Jersey. We all go over the bridge into Philly for work.

I missed this little gem and wanted to thank and second Prankster for that rebuttal.

As an European who has lived in four different European countries and travelled through most of the EU member states I can´t even begin to point out what is false with that statement. But Prankster already got it. So I chill.

But Tzu, for the love of god, please educate yourself on that one. There is no point in arguing if you are basing your argument on such a blatantly false claim. I urge you to add some more shades of grey to your black and white world view.

Yeah I've traveled to Europe a good many times and this (Tzu's assessment) pretty much read as the biggest load of horseshit ever. There is poverty, but what most would consider the middle class standard of life is pretty choice.

Another thing that annoys the hell out me about those broad arguments is this talk about Euope as an example of socialism.

While we might debate the level of social influences in our economies it is just a narrow minded thing to say and quite deceitful. You are aware that Europe still consists of 27 different countries (and these are only the member states of the EU) with 27 different political and economical systems? The difference between the UK, Germany, the Scandinavian countries, Poland, etc. are huge and throwing them all together is misleading and not a base for an argument. These system range from what one might refer to as anglo-saxon captialism to consentual driven societies with pretty much all shades of different approaches to how to built and evolve a society by means of economic and social instruments.

The Obama=socialist arguments demonstrates either deliberate misuse of terms or a complete lack of understanding of them and using Europe as an umbrella of socialism is congruent with both of those possibilities.

Wow, I just came from Holland and I saw...two beggars. Two.

He must be trolling, right? Nobody can actually believe that outrageous a statement .... can they? Tell me that there aren't people in your country that think the rest of the world is some dickensian nightmare ...

What an ignorant little pissant you are.
Oh, and cockfag? Really?

Holy Fuck! Slavery was better than socialism.

You need to stop posting on topics you know absolutely nothing about. It's kind of embarassing.

He's a libertarian. They believe it.

That's it, you are officially talking out of your ass.

First of all, Europe isn't a country so I can only speak from a scandinavian (sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland) point of view, more specifically a Danish point of view.

The US has the 3rd highest GDP per capita in the world but this is so unbelievable skewed to look at since all your wealth is centered around a very small population.

You have neighborhoods with ridiculous 100 room mansions but many more that look like something out of the slums of Somalia, I couldn't believe what I saw when I was driving through the projects of the South.

I live in the country with the world's highest tax pressure. Normally people pay from 42-73% in income tax depending on their income. but that gives us:

-100% free college/university
-a monthly "student" paycheck of 650 dollars for as long as you study (max 6 years). This is not a loan but simply a free gift so students don't have to work so much next to their studies.
-100% free universal healthcare that covers everything.
-100% free care for elders.
- State paid pension ( about 2000 dollars monthly) when you retire to supplement whatever you have saved up.
-If you're jobless the state pays you 2500$ a month until you find a new job. But we have less than 1% unemployment so if you want a job you can get one. Out biggest problem today is that we need more workers. Companies offers rewards to employees who can find people to fill up positions.
-The best infrastructure in the world both broadband and roads public transport etc.

I could go on and on with what "socialism" gives us here. Basically the only really poor people are alcoholics and drug users who need more than the 2500 dollars to satisfy their needs.

Of course not everything is rosy red here we have our share of problems but our basic philosophy is that of equal right and opportunity for all citizens and we truly mean that. This is simply not the case in the US, at least not yet.

ETA: Sweden probably have it even better than us since they don't have the very high taxes on cars that we have, and their broadband is even better with fiber provided to almost everyone. We still "suffer" with old cable and VDSL (10-50 Mbit) connections, although fiber is spreading like crazy.

Fucking braggart.

Can I come come over?

If I were to move to Denmark, how long before I can start receiving those benefits? You guys need workers? I'll work, no problem.

Well if you come as an exchange student you will also benefit from the healthcare and the student pay, so come on over. I know quite a few American exchange students and they love our culture but they are a bit concerned about how much young people drink here (think we have that record too).

The benefits kick in as soon as you get an official address here and a danish social security number. It doesn't require a citizenship, so you'll benefit almost immediately.

May I present to you, a Freerepublic nutjob making a list for "patriots" to do, now that the Marxist is in power:

Hey we are happy too! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTGKUwMegZ4
And I'll stop now :-)

Wow, I'm honestly considering going over to Denmark eventually (maybe I'll take a vacation there next Summer, check it out). I gotta get out of this state at the very least. Sounds like a great country you guys got over there, and no freerepublic nutjobs!

All those points in that article BlueHarvester posted reek of ignorance, but this is the one that bugs me the most:

I....I.....don't even know what to say. So what's their goal? To destroy the economy because they don't like our President? God damn anti-American's. TERRORISTS!

I love how some people's solution is for them and their familes to suffer in order to spite Obama. Nice plan, geniuses.

Yes, even by Scandinavian standards, the danes are considered a jolly bunch, a bit like hobbits if you like. What that makes that grim lot up in Finland, I don't know.

They make the Swiss look sweet!

The European standard of living is quite high. Most European countries have a solidly functioning infrastructure, people get longer vacations and are lucky enough to live within a few hours' plane ride of a variety of geographies and human cultures so they can make use of those vacations, life expectancy is high, and so on. Europe isn't as sleek or plastic as North America, but I'd trade a little modernity for the opportunity to have and affordable annual month-long hiking trips in the Swiss Alps or a week in London on a whim or some such thing. It depends on how you define standard of living, I guess. But this stuff about the European middle class and how low they've sunk is just silly.

To get back at Obama, the Freepers are going to live like hippies. A minimalist lifestyle involving community gardens? Next thing you know, they'll be teaching one another how to card wool.

Not that there's anything wrong with community gardening, but the idea of doing it out of spite for some imagined political boogeyman is odd. Minutemen sort of odd.

What I find hilarious is the idea that the Freepers and Townhallers and other wingnut blog attendees will actually put themselves through all this just to "spite" Obama. These guys couldn't be bothered to sign up for the military in the midst of a war that was supposedly crucial to our very civilization, what makes them think they're going to head out into the woods to live Spartan existences just so they can, supposedly, cripple the financial system?

And that's even weirder--a lot of these actually seem like decent ideas if they were actually followed, partly because they would reduce energy costs and help the environment (live off the land? Great!). And they seem highly confused about whether they're trying to crash the system from overuse or "starve" it by not using it. At any rate, given that most of these people can't be bothered to leave their parent's basement, and have been taught endlessly about the virtue of selfishness, I don't see them banding together as a ninja army to create an illusion of poverty. (And seriously, isn't saying "we have to make it look like poverty is on the rise" pretty much an admission that you don't believe the system works the way you claim it does? If it did, you wouldn't have to "fake poverty".)

At any rate, I'd love to see these guys remove themselves from the mainstream and relevance the way they're claiming, but since it would involve unplugging their internets, I don't see it happening.

As an anarchist I have to respect their ideals, but I doubt their motivation. I don't even care about their reasons. I just doubt their will. These are the same people who have to buy a new SUV every 2 years. The real anarchists and libertarians already do this. I am for one slightly to lazy to be a real anarchist or libertarian, but I think I could do it a lot easier them most of these morons.

Chrysler ALREADY went under, IMO. So did numerous banks and mortgages companies.

Obama's responsibility for that is probably less than 1/100th of one House of Congress' total culpability.

I love political crazies of both stripes. Say, what is Ward Churchill up to these days?

This is off topic, kinda, but aren't anarchists the most selfish type of people?

Of course, just saying your an anarchist is kind of misleading, because there's like 10 different kinds of anarchism. Mutualism, Collectivist, Social, Individualist, etc.

what do Selfish have to do with Anarchist? Anarchist is more to do with distrust of Government and large groups. Anarchist just don't believe in any government larger then say a county seat.

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.