Republicans can’t seem to accurately define what socialism is

[Billy000]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It's an oppressive economic construct that forcibly confiscates the property of some to give to others who didn't earn it. It's immoral and unethical and hardly surprising that you support it.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

 

[Billy000]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

There’s really no need to cite anything. Any program funded by tax payers is socialism. You will figure that out if you look up the actual definition. Our defense budget, for example, is the biggest socialist institution in the world. Lol and of course our infrastructure is socialist. It’s funded by tax payers.

 

[Billy000]

It's an oppressive economic construct that forcibly confiscates the property of some to give to others who didn't earn it. It's immoral and unethical and hardly surprising that you support it.

The very basic definition of the word has nothing to do with this. Socialism’s definition isn’t about authoritarianism.

 

[Lakhota]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Well, they could start out by asking their post office, police dept., fire dept., soldiers, etc...

Socialism is taxpayer funds being used collectively to benefit society as a whole, despite income, contribution, or ability.

75 Ways Socialism Has Improved America

 

[jasonnfree]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

There’s really no need to cite anything. Any program funded by tax payers is socialism. You will figure that out if you look up the actual definition. Our defense budget, for example, is the biggest socialist institution in the world. Lol and of course our infrastructure is socialist. It’s funded by tax payers.

There's not a modern country in the world that doesn't practice socialism in one form or other. Socialism bails out the capitalists pretty often... 1932, 2008. There will probably be another one before Trump finishes his term.

 

[Stratford57]

What's socialism? Oh, it's soooo easy to understand:

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The very basic definition of the word has nothing to do with this. Socialism’s definition isn’t about authoritarianism.

It can't exist without it.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

There’s really no need to cite anything. Any program funded by tax payers is socialism. You will figure that out if you look up the actual definition. Our defense budget, for example, is the biggest socialist institution in the world. Lol and of course our infrastructure is socialist. It’s funded by tax payers.

There's not a modern country in the world that doesn't practice socialism in one form or other. Socialism bails out the capitalists pretty often... 1932, 2008. There will probably be another one before Trump finishes his term.

Socialism did not bail us out in 1932. In fact, it made the problem ten times worse.

 

[Billy000]

The very basic definition of the word has nothing to do with this. Socialism’s definition isn’t about authoritarianism.

It can't exist without it.

You are definitely wrong. Sorry.

 

[shockedcanadian]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

You are right it is broad, and I've typed too many lengthy replies of late to do so again, because this is a subject I really like to discuss. In a nutshell, socialism, or rather "social safety nets" which is what they really were, took off after the Great Depression in the 1930's, I believe Keynesian economics really started to take hold then. This was still peanuts to what the U.S has now and it was far more focused on "earned social benefits" per se such as if you were injured and death of a child. Too often now in the West, it's a "lifestyle" for far too many.

It's simple really, maximum liberty, minimal government. All of the other really intrusive programs and activities will not take hold and socialism will be avoid, and all the misery and hell that it brings.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

There’s really no need to cite anything. Any program funded by tax payers is socialism. You will figure that out if you look up the actual definition. Our defense budget, for example, is the biggest socialist institution in the world. Lol and of course our infrastructure is socialist. It’s funded by tax payers.

Not even remotely, simply because Socialism is based on theft, that doesn't mean it's Socialism. Programs that the government creates aren't inherently Socialism, as it's government ownership of the means of production, which is private industry, which infrastructure is not.

Socialists only fool themselves into thinking infrastructure is Socialist so they can claim it's working, which is of course a joke.

 

[Billy000]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

Citation needed. It looks to me like you're considering infrastructure as Socialist, despite that being totally false, and debunked by me the last time we discussed it.

There’s really no need to cite anything. Any program funded by tax payers is socialism. You will figure that out if you look up the actual definition. Our defense budget, for example, is the biggest socialist institution in the world. Lol and of course our infrastructure is socialist. It’s funded by tax payers.

Not even remotely, simply because Socialism is based on theft, that doesn't mean it's Socialism. Programs that the government creates aren't inherently Socialism, as it's government ownership of the means of production, which is private industry, which infrastructure is not.

Socialists only fool themselves into thinking infrastructure is Socialist so they can claim it's working, which is of course a joke.

Lol the word itself should give you the clue its about people. It’s people’s ownership of programs that they utilize. This is simply facilitated by the government though it’s funded by citizens.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

It's government tyranny.

We have been pretty damn clear about this.

It's a completely failed ideal.

also, very clear about it.

only morons would want it.

can't get more clear than that.

 

[Billy000]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

It's government tyranny.

We have been pretty damn clear about this.

It's a completely failed ideal.

also, very clear about it.

only morons would want it.

can't get more clear than that.

Socialism is a word that applies to any known form of government around the world including the US.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The very basic definition of the word has nothing to do with this. Socialism’s definition isn’t about authoritarianism.

It can't exist without it.

You are definitely wrong. Sorry.

Stop paying your taxes and see what happens.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The truth of the matter is that it is a very broad term. It’s something that’s always been apart of the framework of this country yet Repubs like to pretend it is the antithesis of the Founding Father’s philosophy. Republicans have a hard time even defining the term in their OWN WORDS. That alone tells you they lack a basic understanding of the word.

IN RE: The title

Nor can you. How many threads on socialism have you posted?

 

[Lakhota]

The very basic definition of the word has nothing to do with this. Socialism’s definition isn’t about authoritarianism.

It can't exist without it.

You are definitely wrong. Sorry.

Stop paying your taxes and see what happens.

Stop paying your bills and see what happens. Capitalists don't like that.

 

[Billy000]

The very basic definition of the word has nothing to do with this. Socialism’s definition isn’t about authoritarianism.

It can't exist without it.

You are definitely wrong. Sorry.

Stop paying your taxes and see what happens.

I mean sure - you’re right in terms of the rule of law, but to suggest socialism is exclusively about fascist government is just plain wrong.