The difference between capitalism and socialism in a nutshell

[PaintMyHouse]

of course capitalism is about loving or pleasing your customers more than anyone else in the world, not saying, fuck you to them.

It is astounding how stupid liberalism is.

Too many capitalist would do ANYTHING for the sake of profit. That includes deceiving the consumer.

Unregulated capitalism is like giving booze, cash, and cars to teenagers, at the very same time.

Pure communistic bullshit.

Capitalism is regulated by the invisible hand of the market place.

NO OTHER REGULATORY MECHANISM IS NEEDED UNLESS YOU ARE A TAX CONSUMING PARASITE.

You should really start with Adam Smith, and then move forward. There's a reason why not a single nation in the world has unregulated capitalism. Find out why that is for yourself, even though I already told you why.

Because in every nation on the face of mother earth the megalomaniac-demagogue /parasitic allegiance will not allow Capitalism to prevail.
How can Capitalism where consumers are allow to democratically vote with their dollars and choose the best product or service be contraindicated.

Capitalism, like most human things, contains the seeds of its own destruction. It is up to you to understand why that is true.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

capitalism is great until monopolies arise and kill small business...

Monopolies aren't capitalism....they come from central planning....government collusion with certain businesses.....not what capitalism is about....

That is correct, but they can be very useful at times.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Where do you get this muck from? Sweden is Socialist, a Mixed Economy actually, and do you think life sucks there? It doesn't.

Sweden, 9.6MM people 90% White and 87% Lutheran?

That Sweden?

That is correct, but race has nothing to do with having a decent and honorable economic system.

87% Lutheran it is

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Where do you get this muck from? Sweden is Socialist, a Mixed Economy actually, and do you think life sucks there? It doesn't.

Sweden, 9.6MM people 90% White and 87% Lutheran?

That Sweden?

That is correct, but race has nothing to do with having a decent and honorable economic system.

87% Lutheran it is

And that matters why? Oh right, it does not.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Where do you get this muck from? Sweden is Socialist, a Mixed Economy actually, and do you think life sucks there? It doesn't.

Sweden, 9.6MM people 90% White and 87% Lutheran?

That Sweden?

That is correct, but race has nothing to do with having a decent and honorable economic system.

87% Lutheran it is

And that matters why? Oh right, it does not.

You picked a white, Lutheran country with a population a little great than NYC as your ideal society.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Where do you get this muck from? Sweden is Socialist, a Mixed Economy actually, and do you think life sucks there? It doesn't.

Sweden, 9.6MM people 90% White and 87% Lutheran?

That Sweden?

That is correct, but race has nothing to do with having a decent and honorable economic system.

87% Lutheran it is

And that matters why? Oh right, it does not.

You picked a white, Lutheran country with a population a little great than NYC as your ideal society.

They use common sense there. They aren't alone.

They don't force their teenagers to fuck in the backs of cars, and they don't confuse Jesus with Greed.

 

[westwall]

We, as people, and not baboons, engage in a social contract when we decide to live together within a community. One of the jobs of government is to provide for the common defense. You or I can sit at our homestead and guard our property all day long, and all night long. Won't get too much work done in a situation like that though. Will we? So we contract with government to provide an Army to guard our borders. We also charge the government to do a whole host of things that are neccessary, like building roads, providing a mail service etc.

Someone a long time ago told me that "nobody gets nothin' fer free" so as part of the contract with the government is the ability for it to levy taxes that are used to pay for the services that provide for our common defense.

There is loads of abuse going on, don't get me wrong, but the social contract, and the necessary method of paying for it is both well known, logical, and proper.

Hmm... I get it now!



Yes, there are Marxists and anarchists. That always cracks me up, nicely played.

Dude, defense, police, bridges are not collectivism. I am a small government libertarian and I support those and I am definitely not a collectivist. Those are basic to any government that isn't anarchist. Collectivism in the confiscation and ... wait for it ... redistribution ... of money. That was the question. "So what in your mind justifies government taking property by force from one citizen and giving it to another citizen?" Seriously, by collectivism you meant defense and bridges? Seriously?

Absolutely they are. COLLECTIVELY we all pay for them. Collectivism gone too far is what you are cautioning against, and rightly so, while the progressives here demand the collectivization of this country because they are either lazy, or incompetent, or because they think they will be a part of the ruling class so are thus elitists.

 

[Bfgrn]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

 

[westwall]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Where do you get this muck from? Sweden is Socialist, a Mixed Economy actually, and do you think life sucks there? It doesn't.

And most black neighborhoods are heavily subsidized and life sucks there. Ever been to a black neighborhood? I didn't expect so.

 

[Bfgrn]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

Politburo is the construct of conservatives, who believe decisions should be in the hands of a few. Does the "decider" sound familiar?

Socialism is the construct of liberals, who believe decisions should be in the hands of everyone (all). A democracy. A word you right wing turds despise.


"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

 

[westwall]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

Politburo is the construct of conservatives, who believe decisions should be in the hands of a few. Does the "decider" sound familiar?

Socialism is the construct of liberals, who believe decisions should be in the hands of everyone (all). A democracy. A word you right wing turds despise.


"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Bullcrap. Gulags and concentration camps are the result of a collectivist government run amuck. You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it. Soviet Russia was a collectivist totalitarian government. No matter how you twist yourself up in knots that is a simple fact.

 

[Bfgrn]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

Politburo is the construct of conservatives, who believe decisions should be in the hands of a few. Does the "decider" sound familiar?

Socialism is the construct of liberals, who believe decisions should be in the hands of everyone (all). A democracy. A word you right wing turds despise.


"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Bullcrap. Gulags and concentration camps are the result of a collectivist government run amuck. You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it. Soviet Russia was a collectivist totalitarian government. No matter how you twist yourself up in knots that is a simple fact.

You are an idiot.

Gulags and concentration camps are the result of DICTATORS. ONE "decider". Communism is not "collective". It is mono.

Democracy is a far from a dictatorship as you can get.

col·lec·tive
kəˈlektiv/
adjective
adjective: collective

1. 1.
   done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"
   • belonging or relating to all the members of a group.
     "ministers who share collective responsibility"
     synonyms: common, shared, joint, combined, mutual, communal, pooled;More
     united, allied, cooperative, collaborative
     "our collective interests"
     antonyms: individual
   • taken as a whole; aggregate.
     "the collective power of the workforce"

noun
noun: collective; plural noun: collectives
1.
a cooperative enterprise.

Antonyms exclusive, individual, one-man, one-sided, one-way, single, sole, solitary, unilateral

 

[NYcarbineer]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

Socialism has concern for the common good. Capitalism doesn't. End of story.

 

[NYcarbineer]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

Politburo is the construct of conservatives, who believe decisions should be in the hands of a few. Does the "decider" sound familiar?

Socialism is the construct of liberals, who believe decisions should be in the hands of everyone (all). A democracy. A word you right wing turds despise.


"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Bullcrap. Gulags and concentration camps are the result of a collectivist government run amuck. You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it. Soviet Russia was a collectivist totalitarian government. No matter how you twist yourself up in knots that is a simple fact.

Liberals tend to support democracy. Conservatives tend to fear, or abhor, democracy (at least their sense of it)

calling it 'mob rule'.

The 'mob' though that they refer to is? The common man, the beneficiaries of universal suffrage, the People.

Conservatives want to limit democracy in any manner they can contrive that will give conservatives an advantage.

 

[NYcarbineer]

. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks..

See? They're still around. Openly and unashamedly.

 

[Bfgrn]

You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it.

Coming from right wing turds like you who faun over Putin? Stalin was Putin on steroids.

Under Stalin homosexual activity was punishable with up to five years' hard labor. Stalin banned abortion.

 

[westwall]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

Politburo is the construct of conservatives, who believe decisions should be in the hands of a few. Does the "decider" sound familiar?

Socialism is the construct of liberals, who believe decisions should be in the hands of everyone (all). A democracy. A word you right wing turds despise.


"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Bullcrap. Gulags and concentration camps are the result of a collectivist government run amuck. You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it. Soviet Russia was a collectivist totalitarian government. No matter how you twist yourself up in knots that is a simple fact.

You are an idiot.

Gulags and concentration camps are the result of DICTATORS. ONE "decider". Communism is not "collective". It is mono.

Democracy is a far from a dictatorship as you can get.

col·lec·tive
kəˈlektiv/
adjective
adjective: collective

1. 1.
   done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"
   • belonging or relating to all the members of a group.
     "ministers who share collective responsibility"
     synonyms: common, shared, joint, combined, mutual, communal, pooled;More
     united, allied, cooperative, collaborative
     "our collective interests"
     antonyms: individual
   • taken as a whole; aggregate.
     "the collective power of the workforce"

noun
noun: collective; plural noun: collectives
1.
a cooperative enterprise.

Antonyms exclusive, individual, one-man, one-sided, one-way, single, sole, solitary, unilateral

One dictator and the bureaucracy to support him. Not to mention the political party that maintains his power base. Just give it up dude. All of your revisionist clap trap is just that. Crap.

 

[westwall]

For the enlightenment of liberals who consistently don't get this

Capitalism is economic freedom. Consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals, we make our own choices for our own interest. That drives market efficiency which benefits everyone. The primary role of government in capitalism is to provide civil courts to redress civil crimes (e.g., breach of contract) and criminal courts to redress crimes (e.g., fraud).

An informed buyer/employee is best served with complete and accurate information. I consider it a legitimate role for government to require accurate disclosures. So for example I oppose government forcing a business to hire or serve blacks. However, I am in favor of government forcing them to disclose that clearly and accurately to other potential employees or customers. I also consider it legitimate for government to enforce accurate advertising, whether products were tested or not and how thoroughly, that sort of thing. Government should not force them to do those things, but it can require them to disclose accurately what they did and didn't do to facilitate better buying decisions.

Socialism is central economic planning. Central economic planning means that consumers, producers, employers, employees, businesses, individuals must make decisions that are not in their own interest. Otherwise central planning would not be required, capitalism would yield the same result. And the only way to get people to act against their own interest is force, and only the government can use force.

Various forms of socialism are full socialism where all industry is owned by government, fascism where industry is technically in private ownership but all decisions are dictated or approved by government and crony capitalism where government helps the businesses in quid pro quo fashion where the businesses fund the politicians and the politicians write laws to assist those businesses. In all those cases, planning is central and enforced by government guns to force the people to act against their own interest. To the people, they are the same, you have the choices government gives you.

You are ignorant. You are not describing socialism, you are describing communism. Socialist do not create a Politburo...conservatives do.

You are every bit as ignorant. Politburo's are the construct of collectivist governments run amuck.

Politburo is the construct of conservatives, who believe decisions should be in the hands of a few. Does the "decider" sound familiar?

Socialism is the construct of liberals, who believe decisions should be in the hands of everyone (all). A democracy. A word you right wing turds despise.


"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic and power adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place."
Friedrich August von Hayek-The Road to Serfdom

"In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks principles..."
Friedrich August von Hayek-Why I am Not a Conservative

Bullcrap. Gulags and concentration camps are the result of a collectivist government run amuck. You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it. Soviet Russia was a collectivist totalitarian government. No matter how you twist yourself up in knots that is a simple fact.

Liberals tend to support democracy. Conservatives tend to fear, or abhor, democracy (at least their sense of it)

calling it 'mob rule'.

The 'mob' though that they refer to is? The common man, the beneficiaries of universal suffrage, the People.

Conservatives want to limit democracy in any manner they can contrive that will give conservatives an advantage.

Pure Democracy IS mob rule. That's why the Founders, in their wisdom set this country up as a Constitutional Republic so that the rights of the individual were as protected as possible. Just think, were this a Democracy, the votes would go totally against gay marriage. Most, if not all of the laws that have been passed were voted on by the public. The laws have been changed via judicial fiat, which is wrong, but ultimately the correct result has occurred. Were those protections not memorialized, the gay rights movement would be totally, and utterly screwed.

Thank heaven the Founders foresaw that, and planned accordingly.

 

[westwall]

You political revisionists try and rewrite history but Stalin was not a "conservative" no matter how hard you try and warp your brain around that bit of rationalization. You're just simply full of crap. And you know it.

Coming from right wing turds like you who faun over Putin? Stalin was Putin on steroids.

Under Stalin homosexual activity was punishable with up to five years' hard labor. Stalin banned abortion.

I'm a lefty. I just also have a brain, which you clearly lack. And Putin is a fucking scumbag trying to rebuild the Soviet Union with tactics from the 1930's. I suggest you pull your head out of your ass before you make an even bigger fool of yourself. For your information, yet again, I am pro choice, I am pro gay marriage. So yet again you are simply...wrong!