Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

I like how the Nickster asked you libbies how you're not socialist, what you object to, and while you all object none of you answer the question...

Let me break this down for you in points:

1. I'm not a liberal. I'm not even a Democrat-and I wont be voting Democrat in the upcoming election. Nice try though.

2. I answered the question of name one thing Democrats disagree with Socialism on. I've bolded it in the quote-to save you the effort of finding it.

3. You never answered my question as to how Socialism and Communism are the same thing.

Socialism is a centrally planned economy. Communism is a political structure, they are different dimensions. Communist countries are socialist in that their structure requires a centrally planned economy. But Sweden is socialist as well and they don't require approval for where you live. So your example was wrong in that it contradicts socialism. Capitalism is distributed economic planning. To say you can have a socialist capitalist country is nonsense.

The Democrats are in fact communists though in that they support the measure of communism, the communist manifesto. They don't use the words, but their planks are shallow rephrasing of the document's points. The planks of the communist manifesto are a recipe to control a country in every way. And down the line it's what the Democrats advocate. Democrats are no friend of democracy.

-According to Marx there is no such thing as private property in a Socialist system.

-I never claimed you can have a socialist/capitalistic country, so I'm not sure why you're addressing that towards me?

-The United States isn't a democracy.

-Are you suggesting that every economy that is centrally planned is a socialist country? What about Nazi Germany?

-What 3 things have the Democrats done in the past 20 years, have been in line with the Communist Manifesto?
 
I never cease to be amazed at how little people understand about Socialism. What are some of the Socialist movements the Democrats have done in the past oh, let's say 20 years?

As for one thing Democrats oppose about Socialism? The right to choose where you live, and what property you live on (obviously provided you can afford it).

PS-Socialism is when the general public/producers of a product, control/own the means of production-NOT the government. This means by default Socialism is NOT the same thing as Communism. I'd love to hear how Socialism and Communism are the same thing. It's inaccurate to say anyone (or group of people) promote both Socialism, and Communism. In order for this, they would obviously need to be the same thing. So go ahead guys-let's hear it.


I'm not saying I support Socialism or Communism-I don't. But seriously, get educated on the issues. Go read some Marx (I promise it wont kill you).

You don't know what the fuck socialism is...

Socialism ALWAYS progresses into communism.

Socialism FAILS like you're seeing today in Europe and the government has no choice but to seize the nation and run a "tight ship" which pretty much means you're in prison from that point on (communism).

Socialism is a dictated economy - it doesn't work.

If you get a fucking baby boom under socialism how does that work??? how to you compensate for the excess??

You have a bad crop season how do you feed the people??

Socialism isn't about creating wealth its about sustaining...

How the fuck you going to buy food in a bad growing season from another nation without spending the entitlements??

Thats why all these socialist nations beg for aid, cull or purge when there is a crisis like that.

Wow talk about flying off the deep end. Find me ONE post in ANY of my posts on USMB where I advocate Socialism, or even say aspects of it may be good. ONE.

PS-If Socialism "always" leads to Communism, then by default they are two different systems. (for the record I think Socialism does have quite a bit of potential to reach Communism, I just disagree it always does).
 
Last edited:
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

Noth'n wrong with a little socialism is there Mr Nick?
 
I like how the Nickster asked you libbies how you're not socialist, what you object to, and while you all object none of you answer the question...

Let me break this down for you in points:

1. I'm not a liberal. I'm not even a Democrat-and I wont be voting Democrat in the upcoming election. Nice try though.

2. I answered the question of name one thing Democrats disagree with Socialism on. I've bolded it in the quote-to save you the effort of finding it.

3. You never answered my question as to how Socialism and Communism are the same thing.

Socialism is a centrally planned economy. Communism is a political structure, they are different dimensions. Communist countries are socialist in that their structure requires a centrally planned economy. But Sweden is socialist as well and they don't require approval for where you live. So your example was wrong in that it doesn't contradict socialism. Capitalism is distributed economic planning. To say you can have a socialist capitalist country is nonsense.

The Democrats are in fact communists though in that they support the measure of communism, the communist manifesto. They don't use the words, but their planks are shallow rephrasing of the document's points. The planks of the communist manifesto are a recipe to control a country in every way. And down the line it's what the Democrats advocate. Democrats are no friend of democracy.

Communism is the byproduct of failed socialism. All socialism fails hence all socialism progresses into communism, at least economically.

Of course none of that accounts for the authoritarianism which breeds authoritarian dictators which eventually create the communist state in which eventually has the potential to become totalitarian (see North Korea for a present day example of this).

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that since socialism purpose is to sustain, in order to create an orderly and "modest" population one must be authoritarian to ensure the "planned" or dictated economy works as its supposed to in theory... Now, that creates an environment where freedom is non existent.. Then after time you get guys like Stalin dictating and running the show and a tight ship.
 
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

Noth'n wrong with a little socialism is there Mr Nick?

I'm sure the victims of culls, purges and famine would have a problem with it.

When did capitalists ever boot or murder their own because they lacked enough resources to live???

Oh yeah... That never happened...
 
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

First, give us your definition of socialism. Let's find out how far away from reality you are starting.
 
Let me break this down for you in points:

1. I'm not a liberal. I'm not even a Democrat-and I wont be voting Democrat in the upcoming election. Nice try though.

2. I answered the question of name one thing Democrats disagree with Socialism on. I've bolded it in the quote-to save you the effort of finding it.

3. You never answered my question as to how Socialism and Communism are the same thing.

Socialism is a centrally planned economy. Communism is a political structure, they are different dimensions. Communist countries are socialist in that their structure requires a centrally planned economy. But Sweden is socialist as well and they don't require approval for where you live. So your example was wrong in that it doesn't contradict socialism. Capitalism is distributed economic planning. To say you can have a socialist capitalist country is nonsense.

The Democrats are in fact communists though in that they support the measure of communism, the communist manifesto. They don't use the words, but their planks are shallow rephrasing of the document's points. The planks of the communist manifesto are a recipe to control a country in every way. And down the line it's what the Democrats advocate. Democrats are no friend of democracy.

Communism is the byproduct of failed socialism. All socialism fails hence all socialism progresses into communism, at least economically.

Of course none of that accounts for the authoritarianism which breeds authoritarian dictators which eventually create the communist state in which eventually has the potential to become totalitarian (see North Korea for a present day example of this).

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that since socialism purpose is to sustain, in order to create an orderly and "modest" population one must be authoritarian to ensure the "planned" or dictated economy works as its supposed to in theory... Now, that creates an environment where freedom is non existent.. Then after time you get guys like Stalin dictating and running the show and a tight ship.

This actually makes sense, and I'm inclined to agree with you. A failed Socialism could take a turn away from Communism (but obviously that would require a severe change to the system that nation would currently have in place). But I don't think every dictator rises to power just because of Socialism. While Stalin is accurate-what about Hitler?

But back to my main point at the start of the thread: nobody has said what the Democrats have done in the past 20 years, that is an example of Socialism.
 
I never cease to be amazed at how little people understand about Socialism. What are some of the Socialist movements the Democrats have done in the past oh, let's say 20 years?

As for one thing Democrats oppose about Socialism? The right to choose where you live, and what property you live on (obviously provided you can afford it).

PS-Socialism is when the general public/producers of a product, control/own the means of production-NOT the government. This means by default Socialism is NOT the same thing as Communism. I'd love to hear how Socialism and Communism are the same thing. It's inaccurate to say anyone (or group of people) promote both Socialism, and Communism. In order for this, they would obviously need to be the same thing. So go ahead guys-let's hear it.


I'm not saying I support Socialism or Communism-I don't. But seriously, get educated on the issues. Go read some Marx (I promise it wont kill you).

You don't know what the fuck socialism is...

Socialism ALWAYS progresses into communism.

Socialism FAILS like you're seeing today in Europe and the government has no choice but to seize the nation and run a "tight ship" which pretty much means you're in prison from that point on (communism).

Socialism is a dictated economy - it doesn't work.

If you get a fucking baby boom under socialism how does that work??? how to you compensate for the excess??

You have a bad crop season how do you feed the people??

Socialism isn't about creating wealth its about sustaining...

How the fuck you going to buy food in a bad growing season from another nation without spending the entitlements??

Thats why all these socialist nations beg for aid, cull or purge when there is a crisis like that.

Wow talk about flying off the deep end. Find me ONE post in ANY of my posts on USMB where I advocate Socialism, or even say aspects of it may be good. ONE.

PS-If Socialism "always" leads to Communism, then by default they are two different systems. (for the record I think Socialism does have quite a bit of potential to reach Communism, I just disagree it always does).

Then why the hell are you posting in defense of socialism now??

Or at least attacking those who disagree with the model??

You may not advocate socialism but you certainly sound like you have a problem with those who have a problem with it.
 
You don't know what the fuck socialism is...

Socialism ALWAYS progresses into communism.

Socialism FAILS like you're seeing today in Europe and the government has no choice but to seize the nation and run a "tight ship" which pretty much means you're in prison from that point on (communism).

Socialism is a dictated economy - it doesn't work.

If you get a fucking baby boom under socialism how does that work??? how to you compensate for the excess??

You have a bad crop season how do you feed the people??

Socialism isn't about creating wealth its about sustaining...

How the fuck you going to buy food in a bad growing season from another nation without spending the entitlements??

Thats why all these socialist nations beg for aid, cull or purge when there is a crisis like that.

Wow talk about flying off the deep end. Find me ONE post in ANY of my posts on USMB where I advocate Socialism, or even say aspects of it may be good. ONE.

PS-If Socialism "always" leads to Communism, then by default they are two different systems. (for the record I think Socialism does have quite a bit of potential to reach Communism, I just disagree it always does).

Then why the hell are you posting in defense of socialism now??

Or at least attacking those who disagree with the model??

You may not advocate socialism but you certainly sound like you have a problem with those who have a problem with it.

I'm not defending Socialism-I'm simply saying I don't think the Democrats are advocating Socialism (at the least the majority in congress/elected office). I'm very aware that there is a fringe extreme of the party that does advocate it.

I asked you a very straight forward question with regards to Democrats and Socialism, and so far nobody's answered it. I'm not attacking you-or anybody else on this thread. I'm asking you to back up your claims a little bit with facts.
 
Socialism is a centrally planned economy. Communism is a political structure, they are different dimensions. Communist countries are socialist in that their structure requires a centrally planned economy. But Sweden is socialist as well and they don't require approval for where you live. So your example was wrong in that it doesn't contradict socialism. Capitalism is distributed economic planning. To say you can have a socialist capitalist country is nonsense.

The Democrats are in fact communists though in that they support the measure of communism, the communist manifesto. They don't use the words, but their planks are shallow rephrasing of the document's points. The planks of the communist manifesto are a recipe to control a country in every way. And down the line it's what the Democrats advocate. Democrats are no friend of democracy.

Communism is the byproduct of failed socialism. All socialism fails hence all socialism progresses into communism, at least economically.

Of course none of that accounts for the authoritarianism which breeds authoritarian dictators which eventually create the communist state in which eventually has the potential to become totalitarian (see North Korea for a present day example of this).

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that since socialism purpose is to sustain, in order to create an orderly and "modest" population one must be authoritarian to ensure the "planned" or dictated economy works as its supposed to in theory... Now, that creates an environment where freedom is non existent.. Then after time you get guys like Stalin dictating and running the show and a tight ship.

This actually makes sense, and I'm inclined to agree with you. A failed Socialism could take a turn away from Communism (but obviously that would require a severe change to the system that nation would currently have in place). But I don't think every dictator rises to power just because of Socialism. While Stalin is accurate-what about Hitler?

But back to my main point at the start of the thread: nobody has said what the Democrats have done in the past 20 years, that is an example of Socialism.

Socialism fails on its own because its unable to compensate or adapt to change..

Socialism is meant to sustain the people NOT generate wealth.

The government pays for the people like a bunch of parents would pay for their children, and the capitalism you claim exists under socialism would be like kids trading baseball cards.
 
No its not "regulated capitalism" its government dictated economy with redistribution of wealth.

Well thats the pseudo-capitalist/socialist authoritarian version.

Which is why Europe is all fucked up now...

You got a bunch of retards that don't know how to take care of themselves and the socialist money has gone dry because there is none... Thats why you see all that crazy shit going on - people are throwing rocks because they want their redistributed free money.

Its pretty fucking pathetic.

The only hope Europeans have is to revert back to capitalism or go communist...

So you are an anarchist? You don't belive our govrnment should exsist?

So you can't see any ground at all between European Socialism and Anarchy? Seriously?

That's my question , what government programs make you socialist and which ones do not?
 
Communism is the byproduct of failed socialism. All socialism fails hence all socialism progresses into communism, at least economically.

Of course none of that accounts for the authoritarianism which breeds authoritarian dictators which eventually create the communist state in which eventually has the potential to become totalitarian (see North Korea for a present day example of this).

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that since socialism purpose is to sustain, in order to create an orderly and "modest" population one must be authoritarian to ensure the "planned" or dictated economy works as its supposed to in theory... Now, that creates an environment where freedom is non existent.. Then after time you get guys like Stalin dictating and running the show and a tight ship.

This actually makes sense, and I'm inclined to agree with you. A failed Socialism could take a turn away from Communism (but obviously that would require a severe change to the system that nation would currently have in place). But I don't think every dictator rises to power just because of Socialism. While Stalin is accurate-what about Hitler?

But back to my main point at the start of the thread: nobody has said what the Democrats have done in the past 20 years, that is an example of Socialism.

Socialism fails on its own because its unable to compensate or adapt to change..

Socialism is meant to sustain the people NOT generate wealth.

The government pays for the people like a bunch of parents would pay for their children, and the capitalism you claim exists under socialism would be like kids trading baseball cards.

Link me to the post where I said this.
 
Actually, I'll throw this out there and then duck the flaming.

Socialism and Capitalism have one thing in common, they both sound pretty good on paper. It's when you actually try to carry them out with human beings that things go badly.

Capitalism sounds great on paper. You work hard, your work is rewarded consumerate with your efforts. The reality, though, is that more often than not, you are working very hard to make someone else rich. Someone with more money than you, and less decency. That's the reality, and the only way to beat the system is be part of it. Ugh.

Socialism sounds pretty awesome on paper. We take care of everyone, no one gets left behind. Sounds absolutely decent, and Jesus would approve. Except it, too, is contrary to human nature. If you know you are going to get fed and clothed regardless of your effort level, you just won't make much of an effort level. Pretty soon no one bothers.

So maybe we just need to come up with something other than this awful 16th century system vs. this awful 19th century system.
 
Wow talk about flying off the deep end. Find me ONE post in ANY of my posts on USMB where I advocate Socialism, or even say aspects of it may be good. ONE.

PS-If Socialism "always" leads to Communism, then by default they are two different systems. (for the record I think Socialism does have quite a bit of potential to reach Communism, I just disagree it always does).

Then why the hell are you posting in defense of socialism now??

Or at least attacking those who disagree with the model??

You may not advocate socialism but you certainly sound like you have a problem with those who have a problem with it.

I'm not defending Socialism-I'm simply saying I don't think the Democrats are advocating Socialism (at the least the majority in congress/elected office). I'm very aware that there is a fringe extreme of the party that does advocate it.

I asked you a very straight forward question with regards to Democrats and Socialism, and so far nobody's answered it. I'm not attacking you-or anybody else on this thread. I'm asking you to back up your claims a little bit with facts.

You fucking serious??

Yeah they don't champion the nanny state and cheer on as Obama hijacks auto industries, creates a cash for clunkers program funded via taxpayers that stimulates UAW and passes a stimulus program in which all Americans have to pay for but go directly to the states in which hire union contractors??

Yeah thats not socialism thats a course of socialist action under the capitalist model.

Yeah, neglect the majority and pander to your voting base.
 
Democrats are not going to understand your question. But the answer is that they are socialists, they just don't like the word.

Couldn't you have just said I hate Democrats?

I would have, but I didn't know you hated Democrats.

Here's a question. Name one plank of the Communist Manifesto that Democrats actually oppose

considering that democrats know the Communist Manefesto like republicans know Mein Kamp by heart.
 
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.
nSo I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

Noth'n wrong with a little socialism is there Mr Nick?

I'm sure the victims of culls, purges and famine would have a problem with it.

When did capitalists ever boot or murder their own because they lacked enough resources to live???

Oh yeah... That never happened...

I guess it al depends on what you consider to be socialism doesn't it? If, like most right wingers you consider any money the government spends to help the people, then heck yea....I'm socialist

I am a proud graduate of a socialist school system
I drive on socialist roads
When my house caught fire, a socialist fire department put it out

Now, if you consider socialism to be the government controlling the means of production......then there ain't any of that here
 
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

Democrats are not going to understand your question. But the answer is that they are socialists, they just don't like the word.

Well surprise, I like the word and what it stands for. You probably hate being called a facist, or maybe not............:lol:
 
Actually, I'll throw this out there and then duck the flaming.

Socialism and Capitalism have one thing in common, they both sound pretty good on paper. It's when you actually try to carry them out with human beings that things go badly.

Capitalism sounds great on paper. You work hard, your work is rewarded consumerate with your efforts. The reality, though, is that more often than not, you are working very hard to make someone else rich. Someone with more money than you, and less decency. That's the reality, and the only way to beat the system is be part of it. Ugh.

Socialism sounds pretty awesome on paper. We take care of everyone, no one gets left behind. Sounds absolutely decent, and Jesus would approve. Except it, too, is contrary to human nature. If you know you are going to get fed and clothed regardless of your effort level, you just won't make much of an effort level. Pretty soon no one bothers.

So maybe we just need to come up with something other than this awful 16th century system vs. this awful 19th century system.

Capitalism is a self regulating model.

Capitalism is the only logical economic model...
 
Actually, I'll throw this out there and then duck the flaming.

Socialism and Capitalism have one thing in common, they both sound pretty good on paper. It's when you actually try to carry them out with human beings that things go badly.

Capitalism sounds great on paper. You work hard, your work is rewarded consumerate with your efforts. The reality, though, is that more often than not, you are working very hard to make someone else rich. Someone with more money than you, and less decency. That's the reality, and the only way to beat the system is be part of it. Ugh.

Socialism sounds pretty awesome on paper. We take care of everyone, no one gets left behind. Sounds absolutely decent, and Jesus would approve. Except it, too, is contrary to human nature. If you know you are going to get fed and clothed regardless of your effort level, you just won't make much of an effort level. Pretty soon no one bothers.

So maybe we just need to come up with something other than this awful 16th century system vs. this awful 19th century system.

Capitalism is a self regulating model.

Capitalism is the only logical economic model...

How is capitalism self regulating?
 

Forum List

Back
Top