More Joys Of Socialism

[Harpy Eagle]

Not exactly. OPEC, for instance, sets their own price.

That is not accurate.

If that makes you feel better about yourself.

Yes, the truth always makes me feel better. Perhaps you might try it and see.

 

[bripat9643]

we have no idea because the leftarded morons who are dumber than rocks cant even define it

It seems the righttards have a harder time than the left ones.

There was a thread on this very forum accusing a private company of socialism

Do you want to see proof that he's right?

Answer this question: Is Cuba socialist?

Does Cuba have private companies not owned and controlled by the community as a whole?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

do you define the state to be "the community as a whole?"

No.

But I will open it up a bit further...does Cuba have private companies not owned by the community or the state but by individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Quite being coy. Just answer the question: Is Cuba socialist, communist, or what?

 

[impuretrash]

It seems the righttards have a harder time than the left ones.

There was a thread on this very forum accusing a private company of socialism

Do you want to see proof that he's right?

Answer this question: Is Cuba socialist?

Does Cuba have private companies not owned and controlled by the community as a whole?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

do you define the state to be "the community as a whole?"

No.

But I will open it up a bit further...does Cuba have private companies not owned by the community or the state but by individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Quite being coy. Just answer the question: Is Cuba socialist, communist, or what?

If you want to get technical....by the books "real" communism is perfection, the people collectively own everything and live happy, fulfilled lives hand in hand cooperating for the common good. State authority is practically non-existent. Socialism is the violent, repressive Big government transition point between capitalism and pie in the sky Communism.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It seems the righttards have a harder time than the left ones.

There was a thread on this very forum accusing a private company of socialism

Do you want to see proof that he's right?

Answer this question: Is Cuba socialist?

Does Cuba have private companies not owned and controlled by the community as a whole?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

do you define the state to be "the community as a whole?"

No.

But I will open it up a bit further...does Cuba have private companies not owned by the community or the state but by individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Quite being coy. Just answer the question: Is Cuba socialist, communist, or what?

I would go with Communist


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Do you want to see proof that he's right?

Answer this question: Is Cuba socialist?

Does Cuba have private companies not owned and controlled by the community as a whole?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

do you define the state to be "the community as a whole?"

No.

But I will open it up a bit further...does Cuba have private companies not owned by the community or the state but by individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Quite being coy. Just answer the question: Is Cuba socialist, communist, or what?

If you want to get technical....by the books "real" communism is perfection, the people collectively own everything and live happy, fulfilled lives hand in hand cooperating for the common good. State authority is practically non-existent. Socialism is the violent, repressive Big government transition point between capitalism and pie in the sky Communism.

I think you have it backwards


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[impuretrash]

Does Cuba have private companies not owned and controlled by the community as a whole?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

do you define the state to be "the community as a whole?"

No.

But I will open it up a bit further...does Cuba have private companies not owned by the community or the state but by individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Quite being coy. Just answer the question: Is Cuba socialist, communist, or what?

If you want to get technical....by the books "real" communism is perfection, the people collectively own everything and live happy, fulfilled lives hand in hand cooperating for the common good. State authority is practically non-existent. Socialism is the violent, repressive Big government transition point between capitalism and pie in the sky Communism.

I think you have it backwards


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

That's what it says in the books. Marx wouldn't be so popular with soyboys if his theories promised to install a corrupt, harsh, authoritarian govt...The old days communists in the 1930s were tough and mean, willing to fight and die to make their ideal a reality. Willing to suffer under repressive authority (socialism) for a time...

But intellectual Jewish/German weenies lacked the testicular fortitude for all that. So they devised cultural Marxism which is supposed to gradually transform society into Communist utopia without all the bloodshed.

 

[Wry Catcher]

They always lie about what it is. socialists

Always. Never in history have socialists delivered on their promises. Never. Instead of fair treatment, a fair-share ownership of the fruits of their labors, which is a BIG time promise/lie from socialists, food and medical care....

This is what they get.

Every time socialism is instituted, no matter where, no matter how. Regardless of how it got there, whether it was inherited from Soviet Russia like in North Korea or legally voted in like in Venezuela (the one and only time ever) or whether it is instituted through force of arms and rebellion.....

Death disease, ABSOLUTE TOTALITARIANISM, despair and a total lack of hope sets in.

Every time.

Oh, those pictures? From a North Korean famine.

Know why there's always famines in North Korea? Because socialists are so incredibly stupid, they can't even feed their own people.

Just like now. The same thing is happening in commie-land North Korea.

Know why the Norks just launched missiles into the East Sea?

Of course you don't. Not if you get your news from the DISGUSTING FILTH.

They're doing it because they had another in a long line of bad harvests.

North Korea faces food crisis after poor harvest, U.N. says - Reuters

So they chuck some missiles into the Sea...

N. Korea launches 'barrage' of short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan: Officials

... and hope that America will do whatever they have to do to keep the Norks from starting a War they would lose badly. Very badly. As in, it would be over in a week. Or less. Then, we'd have millions of starving refugees to worry about.

In the past, Presidents both dimocrap and Republican would bow to Kim's lunacy and ship him food and (in The Rapist's case, the ability to make Nukes) medicine to see them through a year or two of more stupidity.

If you want to live like the North Koreans and the Venezuelans, you need to vote dimocrap.

I promise you, they'll get you there. guaranteed

It's happened 100% of the time in past.

Now that we've heard from the unlearned, let's hear from the learned:

Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons' moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. Socrates uses something quite like a social contract argument to explain to Crito why he must remain in prison and accept the death penalty. However, social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. After Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of this enormously influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories within moral and political theory throughout the history of the modern West. In the twentieth century, moral and political theory regained philosophical momentum as a result of John Rawls’ Kantian version of social contract theory, and was followed by new analyses of the subject by David Gauthier and others. More recently, philosophers from different perspectives have offered new criticisms of social contract theory. In particular, feminists and race-conscious philosophers have argued that social contract theory is at least an incomplete picture of our moral and political lives, and may in fact camouflage some of the ways in which the contract is itself parasitical upon the subjugation of classes of persons.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#SH3b

All of those who lump all Democrats as liberals or progressives (libtards or progs) have no understanding of political economy and history; they echo each other and are out of touch with reality.

To correct Galbraith: "The modern liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for covetousness."

You're confused, it is the callous conservative set which is greedy, selfish and has an excessive desire for money and material things.

Well, not really confused, you like many on the right accuse others of what you are and/or do.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Do you want to see proof that he's right?

Answer this question: Is Cuba socialist?

Does Cuba have private companies not owned and controlled by the community as a whole?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

do you define the state to be "the community as a whole?"

No.

But I will open it up a bit further...does Cuba have private companies not owned by the community or the state but by individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Quite being coy. Just answer the question: Is Cuba socialist, communist, or what?

If you want to get technical....by the books "real" communism is perfection, the people collectively own everything and live happy, fulfilled lives hand in hand cooperating for the common good. State authority is practically non-existent. Socialism is the violent, repressive Big government transition point between capitalism and pie in the sky Communism.

This person in the video is NOT conservative in any means. But she sure does say it like it is.

 

[daveman]

Not exactly. OPEC, for instance, sets their own price.

That is not accurate.

Granted. My understanding was wrong.

If that makes you feel better about yourself.

Yes, the truth always makes me feel better. Perhaps you might try it and see.

Oh, I'm a big fan of the truth. Other people -- not so much. They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried.

 

[daveman]

They always lie about what it is. socialists

Always. Never in history have socialists delivered on their promises. Never. Instead of fair treatment, a fair-share ownership of the fruits of their labors, which is a BIG time promise/lie from socialists, food and medical care....

This is what they get.

Every time socialism is instituted, no matter where, no matter how. Regardless of how it got there, whether it was inherited from Soviet Russia like in North Korea or legally voted in like in Venezuela (the one and only time ever) or whether it is instituted through force of arms and rebellion.....

Death disease, ABSOLUTE TOTALITARIANISM, despair and a total lack of hope sets in.

Every time.

Oh, those pictures? From a North Korean famine.

Know why there's always famines in North Korea? Because socialists are so incredibly stupid, they can't even feed their own people.

Just like now. The same thing is happening in commie-land North Korea.

Know why the Norks just launched missiles into the East Sea?

Of course you don't. Not if you get your news from the DISGUSTING FILTH.

They're doing it because they had another in a long line of bad harvests.

North Korea faces food crisis after poor harvest, U.N. says - Reuters

So they chuck some missiles into the Sea...

N. Korea launches 'barrage' of short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan: Officials

... and hope that America will do whatever they have to do to keep the Norks from starting a War they would lose badly. Very badly. As in, it would be over in a week. Or less. Then, we'd have millions of starving refugees to worry about.

In the past, Presidents both dimocrap and Republican would bow to Kim's lunacy and ship him food and (in The Rapist's case, the ability to make Nukes) medicine to see them through a year or two of more stupidity.

If you want to live like the North Koreans and the Venezuelans, you need to vote dimocrap.

I promise you, they'll get you there. guaranteed

It's happened 100% of the time in past.

Now that we've heard from the unlearned, let's hear from the learned:

Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons' moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. Socrates uses something quite like a social contract argument to explain to Crito why he must remain in prison and accept the death penalty. However, social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. After Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of this enormously influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories within moral and political theory throughout the history of the modern West. In the twentieth century, moral and political theory regained philosophical momentum as a result of John Rawls’ Kantian version of social contract theory, and was followed by new analyses of the subject by David Gauthier and others. More recently, philosophers from different perspectives have offered new criticisms of social contract theory. In particular, feminists and race-conscious philosophers have argued that social contract theory is at least an incomplete picture of our moral and political lives, and may in fact camouflage some of the ways in which the contract is itself parasitical upon the subjugation of classes of persons.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#SH3b

All of those who lump all Democrats as liberals or progressives (libtards or progs) have no understanding of political economy and history; they echo each other and are out of touch with reality.

To correct Galbraith: "The modern liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for covetousness."

You're confused, it is the callous conservative set which is greedy, selfish and has an excessive desire for money and material things.

Well, not really confused, you like many on the right accuse others of what you are and/or do.

And the streak of Fly Catcher getting it completely wrong continues.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Not exactly. OPEC, for instance, sets their own price.

That is not accurate.

Granted. My understanding was wrong.

If that makes you feel better about yourself.

Yes, the truth always makes me feel better. Perhaps you might try it and see.

Oh, I'm a big fan of the truth. Other people -- not so much. They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried.

Statement: "They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried"

Response:

• Social Democracies have existed for decades in Western Europe.
• To my knowledge no nation has every come close to establishing a communist state as envisioned by Marx

 

[DustyInfinity]

I know many talk about the spectrum of socialism. It is the most common excuse for supporting it. The argument is always that we are already a certain degree on the spectrum, therefore, socialism is just dandy. Others have rightly pointed out that socialism is a stepping stone to communism. The left's socialism by degrees argument actually supports this belief. To people like Mac, and our farmer hating friend, why would anyone support any slide left further than absolutely necessary. We already have people banning sodas, books, speakers, actual words, and more. We have leaders who think the world will end in 12 years and that Guam will tip over. Do you think they will ever stop banning things? Giving up individual control and rights for these idiots and madmen will result in disastrous results. It always does. ALWAYS. Our constitution tried to protect us from our biggest threat, our own leaders. These people have more power to hurt us than anyone else on earth. I know I'm cynical, but these people aren't just stupid, they don't care about us at all. Government gets bigger, citizens's votes mean less and less, and eventually the government starts using its own people for firewood. History shows this over and over. I'm thinking now is a pretty good time to keep this tragedy from happening again.

 

[bripat9643]

They always lie about what it is. socialists

Always. Never in history have socialists delivered on their promises. Never. Instead of fair treatment, a fair-share ownership of the fruits of their labors, which is a BIG time promise/lie from socialists, food and medical care....

This is what they get.

Every time socialism is instituted, no matter where, no matter how. Regardless of how it got there, whether it was inherited from Soviet Russia like in North Korea or legally voted in like in Venezuela (the one and only time ever) or whether it is instituted through force of arms and rebellion.....

Death disease, ABSOLUTE TOTALITARIANISM, despair and a total lack of hope sets in.

Every time.

Oh, those pictures? From a North Korean famine.

Know why there's always famines in North Korea? Because socialists are so incredibly stupid, they can't even feed their own people.

Just like now. The same thing is happening in commie-land North Korea.

Know why the Norks just launched missiles into the East Sea?

Of course you don't. Not if you get your news from the DISGUSTING FILTH.

They're doing it because they had another in a long line of bad harvests.

North Korea faces food crisis after poor harvest, U.N. says - Reuters

So they chuck some missiles into the Sea...

N. Korea launches 'barrage' of short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan: Officials

... and hope that America will do whatever they have to do to keep the Norks from starting a War they would lose badly. Very badly. As in, it would be over in a week. Or less. Then, we'd have millions of starving refugees to worry about.

In the past, Presidents both dimocrap and Republican would bow to Kim's lunacy and ship him food and (in The Rapist's case, the ability to make Nukes) medicine to see them through a year or two of more stupidity.

If you want to live like the North Koreans and the Venezuelans, you need to vote dimocrap.

I promise you, they'll get you there. guaranteed

It's happened 100% of the time in past.

Now that we've heard from the unlearned, let's hear from the learned:

Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons' moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. Socrates uses something quite like a social contract argument to explain to Crito why he must remain in prison and accept the death penalty. However, social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. After Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of this enormously influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories within moral and political theory throughout the history of the modern West. In the twentieth century, moral and political theory regained philosophical momentum as a result of John Rawls’ Kantian version of social contract theory, and was followed by new analyses of the subject by David Gauthier and others. More recently, philosophers from different perspectives have offered new criticisms of social contract theory. In particular, feminists and race-conscious philosophers have argued that social contract theory is at least an incomplete picture of our moral and political lives, and may in fact camouflage some of the ways in which the contract is itself parasitical upon the subjugation of classes of persons.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#SH3b

All of those who lump all Democrats as liberals or progressives (libtards or progs) have no understanding of political economy and history; they echo each other and are out of touch with reality.

To correct Galbraith: "The modern liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for covetousness."

You're confused, it is the callous conservative set which is greedy, selfish and has an excessive desire for money and material things.

Well, not really confused, you like many on the right accuse others of what you are and/or do.

Sleazy turds like you are the kind who are always demanding other people's money.

 

[daveman]

Not exactly. OPEC, for instance, sets their own price.

That is not accurate.

Granted. My understanding was wrong.

If that makes you feel better about yourself.

Yes, the truth always makes me feel better. Perhaps you might try it and see.

Oh, I'm a big fan of the truth. Other people -- not so much. They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried.

Statement: "They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried"

Response:

• Social Democracies have existed for decades in Western Europe.
• To my knowledge no nation has every come close to establishing a communist state as envisioned by Marx

Oh, look. You just proved my point.

 

[McRocket]

They always lie about what it is. socialists

Always. Never in history have socialists delivered on their promises. Never. Instead of fair treatment, a fair-share ownership of the fruits of their labors, which is a BIG time promise/lie from socialists, food and medical care....

This is what they get.

Every time socialism is instituted, no matter where, no matter how. Regardless of how it got there, whether it was inherited from Soviet Russia like in North Korea or legally voted in like in Venezuela (the one and only time ever) or whether it is instituted through force of arms and rebellion.....

Death disease, ABSOLUTE TOTALITARIANISM, despair and a total lack of hope sets in.

Every time.

Oh, those pictures? From a North Korean famine.

Know why there's always famines in North Korea? Because socialists are so incredibly stupid, they can't even feed their own people.

Just like now. The same thing is happening in commie-land North Korea.

Know why the Norks just launched missiles into the East Sea?

Of course you don't. Not if you get your news from the DISGUSTING FILTH.

They're doing it because they had another in a long line of bad harvests.

North Korea faces food crisis after poor harvest, U.N. says - Reuters

So they chuck some missiles into the Sea...

N. Korea launches 'barrage' of short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan: Officials

... and hope that America will do whatever they have to do to keep the Norks from starting a War they would lose badly. Very badly. As in, it would be over in a week. Or less. Then, we'd have millions of starving refugees to worry about.

In the past, Presidents both dimocrap and Republican would bow to Kim's lunacy and ship him food and (in The Rapist's case, the ability to make Nukes) medicine to see them through a year or two of more stupidity.

If you want to live like the North Koreans and the Venezuelans, you need to vote dimocrap.

I promise you, they'll get you there. guaranteed

It's happened 100% of the time in past.

Interesting. So you know every, single political promise a socialist has ever made?

Because that is the only way you could even begin to accurately determine that they have never - in history - delivered on their promises.

So where is this link to every, single political promise in history that a socialist has made?

 

[daveman]

They always lie about what it is. socialists

Always. Never in history have socialists delivered on their promises. Never. Instead of fair treatment, a fair-share ownership of the fruits of their labors, which is a BIG time promise/lie from socialists, food and medical care....

This is what they get.

Every time socialism is instituted, no matter where, no matter how. Regardless of how it got there, whether it was inherited from Soviet Russia like in North Korea or legally voted in like in Venezuela (the one and only time ever) or whether it is instituted through force of arms and rebellion.....

Death disease, ABSOLUTE TOTALITARIANISM, despair and a total lack of hope sets in.

Every time.

Oh, those pictures? From a North Korean famine.

Know why there's always famines in North Korea? Because socialists are so incredibly stupid, they can't even feed their own people.

Just like now. The same thing is happening in commie-land North Korea.

Know why the Norks just launched missiles into the East Sea?

Of course you don't. Not if you get your news from the DISGUSTING FILTH.

They're doing it because they had another in a long line of bad harvests.

North Korea faces food crisis after poor harvest, U.N. says - Reuters

So they chuck some missiles into the Sea...

N. Korea launches 'barrage' of short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan: Officials

... and hope that America will do whatever they have to do to keep the Norks from starting a War they would lose badly. Very badly. As in, it would be over in a week. Or less. Then, we'd have millions of starving refugees to worry about.

In the past, Presidents both dimocrap and Republican would bow to Kim's lunacy and ship him food and (in The Rapist's case, the ability to make Nukes) medicine to see them through a year or two of more stupidity.

If you want to live like the North Koreans and the Venezuelans, you need to vote dimocrap.

I promise you, they'll get you there. guaranteed

It's happened 100% of the time in past.

Now that we've heard from the unlearned, let's hear from the learned:

Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons' moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. Socrates uses something quite like a social contract argument to explain to Crito why he must remain in prison and accept the death penalty. However, social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. After Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of this enormously influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories within moral and political theory throughout the history of the modern West. In the twentieth century, moral and political theory regained philosophical momentum as a result of John Rawls’ Kantian version of social contract theory, and was followed by new analyses of the subject by David Gauthier and others. More recently, philosophers from different perspectives have offered new criticisms of social contract theory. In particular, feminists and race-conscious philosophers have argued that social contract theory is at least an incomplete picture of our moral and political lives, and may in fact camouflage some of the ways in which the contract is itself parasitical upon the subjugation of classes of persons.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#SH3b

All of those who lump all Democrats as liberals or progressives (libtards or progs) have no understanding of political economy and history; they echo each other and are out of touch with reality.

To correct Galbraith: "The modern liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for covetousness."

You're confused, it is the callous conservative set which is greedy, selfish and has an excessive desire for money and material things.

Well, not really confused, you like many on the right accuse others of what you are and/or do.

Sleazy turds like you are the kind who are always demanding other people's money.

But it makes him feel all warm and fuzzy, so that's a good reason to give him your money.

 

[Oddball]

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

not only is it not real socialism, it is not even fake socialism. People need to learn the difference between socialism and Communism.

What is real socialism?

we have no idea because the leftarded morons who are dumber than rocks cant even define it

It seems the righttards have a harder time than the left ones.

There was a thread on this very forum accusing a private company of socialism

when i first showed up here their were 35 threads on "socialism what are you so scared of "

go ahead define socialism for us...give us a SOLID left wing definition since the "conservatives" " cant "

id steer clear of the highways ,sewers, army ,and post office if you dont wanna look like a friggin tool

See post # 28 and you will find the definition.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

you probably did that while i was typing to bri and the page flipped

didnt originally see it

top down and bottom down socialism /communism defined

youre a bottom ? tee hee

thats the millennial craze bottom up .....this time it'll work ...no really my diversity officer told me it would

bottom up ......ya still have to pick leaders and we all know how that works out

well not all of us. the morons of the left have no idea what theyre asking for

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Oh, I'm a big fan of the truth. Other people -- not so much. They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried.

Communism has been tried and is still being tried.

I suppose voluntary socialism could be a good thing for those who choose it, but human nature will never allow it to work.

 

[Edgetho]

Oh, I'm a big fan of the truth. Other people -- not so much. They tend to insist that socialism is great and real Communism has never been tried.

Communism has been tried and is still being tried.

I suppose voluntary socialism could be a good thing for those who choose it, but human nature will never allow it to work.

Isn't that the point?

I'd like to leave the keys in my car and the doors unlocked when I pop into the store, but human nature won't let me.

I would have like to have let my 14 year old daughter go to the hip hop concert unaccompanied, but human nature won't let me.

socialism is a wonderful theory. But it stupidly doesn't account for human nature.

You let a dimocrap SCUMBAG have TOTAL power in this Country and what the FUCK do you THINK is gonna happen?

Seriously.

What do you think would happen if a moron like Cameltoe Harris had TOTAL power? Or somebody like AOC?

Or, wanna send a shiver up your personal spine????

How about this, dimocrap scum?

How would you like it if Donald Trump had TOTAL power in this Country?

And here's the thing...... With socialism, everybody has to be on board or it just won't even get close to working. For that reason, TOTAL power is vested in the government. TOTAL power to ensure 100% participation.

How many times have we heard, "It would have worked if everybody was socialist."

It isn't so much that socialism in and of itself is so bad (it's really more stupid than bad) it's that you have to yield ALL power to an ALL POWERFUL government.

And what you idiot, stupid dimocrap scum don't understand --

Sometimes bad people ascend to the position of leader of that all-powerful government.

And, if they aren't bad when they get there, they will be in short order.

Every time. Every.Single.Time.

It's Human Nature.