The difference between Communism and Socialism

[Mr Natural]

I used to look at it this way:

Establishments that didn't take credit cards at all were Communists.

Establishments that took credit cards other than American Express were Socialists.

 

[Oddball]

That's what we know as the classic strawman argument.

Control how to define "THEM", as mean, closed-minded, bigoted, sexist, racist, homophobic brutes, to "prove" how wonderful, open-minded and "inclusive" the "WE" are.

Also see: Hegelian dialectic.

Hey Jethro...you can't accuse people (liberals) of being sissies, weaklings, pacifists, tree huggers, nig_er lovers and queers, then turn around and accuse them of being fasicts, authoritarians and dictators.

What does that have to do with anything?

I mean besides the creation of yet another of your patented strawmen.

 

[Bfgrn]

That's what we know as the classic strawman argument.

Control how to define "THEM", as mean, closed-minded, bigoted, sexist, racist, homophobic brutes, to "prove" how wonderful, open-minded and "inclusive" the "WE" are.

Also see: Hegelian dialectic.

Hey Jethro...you can't accuse people (liberals) of being sissies, weaklings, pacifists, tree huggers, nig_er lovers and queers, then turn around and accuse them of being fasicts, authoritarians and dictators.

What does that have to do with anything?

I mean besides the creation of yet another of your patented strawmen.

If you are really interested in becoming enlightened on the capture and control of 'language' I suggest you look at the right, not the left.

 

[JBeukema]

Conservatism = attachment to religion or family or tribe.

Conservatism is n ideology. It refers simply to the reactionaries and those in power, who have a vested interest in the staus quo or in resotring the status quo ante. The Tories, the KKK,and the White Army in Russia were all conservative (reactionary) groups.

]If you think Marx had any kind of genuine attachment to democracy you are mistaken.

There's a point there

 

[JBeukema]

(sorry to end with a preposition)

'Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which will not put!'

gave the state an ever-increasing role in controlling the means of production

I am not an advocate of central economic planning. It's a large part of what makes me a moderate, conservative, or 'Right' social democrat. In fact, you can argue that's the biggest difference between 'Right' social democracy and social democrats who sit further to the left, closer to democratic socialism As an advocate of the market, I realize that the market cannot exist as such and function in is full capacity if it is artificially steered by some small elite. Whether that elite is group of businessmen (oligopoly) or politicians (see: Keynesianism) makes no real difference when it comes to their detrimental effect on the health of the market.

And speaking of 'killing,' From “The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression,” which is a compilation of research edited by French scholar Stephane Courtois, totals over 100 million victims of Communist murder during the 20th Century.

I';m actually waiting for that book to arrive at the library

Most intellectuals today are aware of what communism, socialism, totalitarianism, or any central command-and-control doctrine has done in Russia

Socialism doesn't belong in that sentence, as true socialism does not put into place an oligarchy.

From the OP:

9. Where Socialists aim to achieve freedom and justice by removing the exploitation which divides men under capitalism, Communists seek to sharpen those class divisions only in order to establish the dictatorship of a single party.


10. International Communism is the instrument of a new imperialism. Wherever it has achieved power it has destroyed freedom or the chance of gaining freedom. It is based on a militarist bureaucracy and a terrorist police. By producing glaring contrasts of wealth and privilege it has created a new class society. Forced labour plays an important part in its economic organisation.

POLITICAL DEMOCRACY
2. Without freedom there can be no Socialism. Socialism can be achieved only through democracy. Democracy can be fully realised only through Socialism.
3. Democracy is government of the people, by the people, for the people. It must secure:
a. The right of every human being to a private life, protected from arbitrary invasion by the state.
b. Political liberties like freedom of thought, expression, education, organisation and religion.
c. The representation of the people through free elections, under universal, equal and secret franchise.
d. Government by the majority and respect for the rights of the minority.
e. The equality before the law of all citizens, whatever their birth, sex, language, creed and colour.

These are the same values espoused by 'conservatives' in America, except that those 'conservatives', by their nature and definition, have always defended systems that oppressed the lower classes and refused to see women and non-whites (not to mention non-Christians and the poor) as equals in society.

 

[JBeukema]

Most intellectuals today are aware of what communism, socialism, totalitarianism, or any central command-and-control doctrine has done in Russia, under Mao’s reign of terror, or Cuba or other grotesque examples. Yet great numbers of them will use every excuse to avoid attributing the problems to their economic systems. Even a superficial comparison of North and South Korea, East and West Germany before the Berlin Wall fell, Hong Kong and Mainland China before reforms, or Cuba and other countries in Latin America, demonstrate that free economies are superior at promoting the common good. And yet the mystification continues. Socialist true believers have the power to cloud their own minds.

Yeah, but.....but...but....but.....it's never been tried MY way!

Compare the condition of the working class in London today to its condition in 1844 to see the effects of socialist reforms.

 

[JBeukema]

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/A2a2momdss8&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/A2a2momdss8&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

What does the HCR bill have to do with anything? Go do a quick search; I was against the bill the entire time.

 

[JBeukema]

Liberals pretend to care about the people even as the liberals dispossess the people.

Exactly. Hence my repeated condemnations of Liberalism.

From Voltaire, who praised tyrants like Catherine the Great, to Robespierre to the Bolsheviks to George Soros liberal elitists have hi-jacked reform movements and betrayed the people.

Did you really just say the Bolsheviks were followers of Locke and Hume? And the Bolshevicks were never a reformist movement. That'd be the Mensheviks; the Bolsheviks were revolutionaries from the get-go.

 

[JBeukema]

That's what we know as the classic strawman argument.

Control how to define "THEM", as mean, closed-minded, bigoted, sexist, racist, homophobic brutes, to "prove" how wonderful, open-minded and "inclusive" the "WE" are.

Also see: Hegelian dialectic.

Like all your posts about the 'Jacobin fascist communist progressive nazis who hate America'?

 

[GHook93]

Socialism is the means to the Communist End!

 

[JBeukema]

Socialism is the means to the Communist End!

Not all socialists view communism as the end. There are lines of thought that view Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, New Democracy, or some other system as the end rather than the means.

We tend to not get along very well with Communists- especially given their habit of trying to kill us all whenever they get any power.

 

[Bfgrn]

That's what we know as the classic strawman argument.

Control how to define "THEM", as mean, closed-minded, bigoted, sexist, racist, homophobic brutes, to "prove" how wonderful, open-minded and "inclusive" the "WE" are.

Also see: Hegelian dialectic.

Like all your posts about the 'Jacobin fascist communist progressive nazis who hate America'?

Don't forget his "Beck' parroting caw...

 

[B. Kidd]

Socialism - individual taxed to the max on what they earn and buy and still can complain.

Communism - individual's earnings and bought goods so pitiful they are not worth really taxing and dare not complain.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/A2a2momdss8&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/A2a2momdss8&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

What does the HCR bill have to do with anything? Go do a quick search; I was against the bill the entire time.

The vid expresses the liberal perspective: folks are just lumps of clay that must be led, only progressives/liberals know what is good for them!

This is an historically accurate representation of lib outlook:

Progressives know they are smarter than everyone else: “President Woodrow Wilson, a leading progressive, spoke often of his "vision," introducing a term that has now become central to our understanding of presidential politics. Wilson believed, as Kesler puts it, "that to become a leader you have to have a vision of the future and communicate that vision to the unanointed, mass public. You have to make them believe in your prophetic ability."
The Roots Of Liberalism - Forbes.com


Modern journalism: use of media to ‘teach’ people. Alter journalism from reporting facts to editorializing in the news, as the elites always know better. Walter Lippmann, (American newspaper commentator and author who in a 60-year career made himself one of the most widely respected political columnists in the world.)Public Opinion, “When properly deployed in the public interest, the manufacture of consent is useful and necessary for a cohesive society, because, in many cases, “the common interests” of the public are not obvious, and only become clear upon careful analysis of the collected data — a critical intellectual exercise in which most people either are uninterested or incapable of doing. Therefore, most people must have the world summarized for them, by the well-informed.” Public Opinion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JBeukema]

The vid expresses the liberal perspective

Okay... this thread is about communism and socialism, not liberalism.

They're three different things. You know, like Hinduism, Catholicism, and Zoroastrianism. There are a few similarities and a lot of differences.

This is an historically accurate representation of lib outlook:

Progressives know they are smarter than everyone else

So liberals think that progressives think they're smarter than everyone else?

You do realize that red, blue, and yellow are not the same thing, right?

 

[Oddball]

Hey Jethro...you can't accuse people (liberals) of being sissies, weaklings, pacifists, tree huggers, nig_er lovers and queers, then turn around and accuse them of being fasicts, authoritarians and dictators.

What does that have to do with anything?

I mean besides the creation of yet another of your patented strawmen.

If you are really interested in becoming enlightened on the capture and control of 'language' I suggest you look at the right, not the left.

Thanks for not answering the question and deferring to your standard imaginary hobgoblin boogermen.

I know enough about language and semantics and the bastardization of them to know the both the left and right do it with equal aplomb.

But then again, I'm not the one here playing the Hegelian game here...You are.

 

[Oddball]

That's what we know as the classic strawman argument.

Control how to define "THEM", as mean, closed-minded, bigoted, sexist, racist, homophobic brutes, to "prove" how wonderful, open-minded and "inclusive" the "WE" are.

Also see: Hegelian dialectic.

Like all your posts about the 'Jacobin fascist communist progressive nazis who hate America'?

Don't remember ever saying that one.

I do, however, recall you sourcing both the Jacobins and Das Kapital to support your authoritarian central planner arguments, so it only follows in your particular case.

 

[Bfgrn]

What does that have to do with anything?

I mean besides the creation of yet another of your patented strawmen.

If you are really interested in becoming enlightened on the capture and control of 'language' I suggest you look at the right, not the left.

Thanks for not answering the question and deferring to your standard imaginary hobgoblin boogermen.

I know enough about language and semantics and the bastardization of them to know the both the left and right do it with equal aplomb.

But then again, I'm not the one here playing the Hegelian game here...You are.

My point Jethro is reality. Your charges of authoritarianism and the left has no basis, except in your internal emotional fear mechanism.

You really have no understanding of language and the disparity between the left and the right. The right views every word as a war of ownership and they tailor message and PR as if it were a battle in a war. There are numerous think tanks and conservative organizations that dedicate resources and personnel to that specific goal.

The left basically has no structure that brainstorms words and language. Liberals and progressives believe facts and ideas should be all that is needed to inform the public. And that proposing what is right based on those facts and ideas will create either votes or public support for policies and laws. They are less aggressive and consequently they are losing the war of words...BIG time.

So Jethro, it seem inevitable that the right will win out. It is a shame people like you are so brainwashed that you will willingly walk into the abyss.

How conservatives use language to dominate politics

 

[Oddball]

Speaking of unfounded fear!

I'm the one who sees virtually no difference of substance between the purported left and right.

You, on the other hand, go about daily manic diatribes claiming that your favored brand of authoritarian serfdom is a better deal than "THEM". Along the way, you project and throw every logical fallacy in the book at...."THEM"!

All the while patting "US" on the back for being sooooo upright, fair, just and honest.

You're the Hegelean dialectic come to life.

 

[Bfgrn]

Speaking of unfounded fear!

I'm the one who sees virtually no difference of substance between the purported left and right.

You, on the other hand, go about daily manic diatribes claiming that your favored brand of authoritarian serfdom is a better deal than "THEM". Along the way, you project and throw every logical fallacy in the book at...."THEM"!

All the while patting "US" on the back for being sooooo upright, fair, just and honest.

You're the Hegelean dialectic come to life.

You need to read Karl Popper's total dismissal of Hegel.

You don't see any difference between the left or right...your beliefs are that everyone on the far right is correct, and anyone on the right that isn't in line with the far right is just a Democrat that call himself a conservative. You claim to follow the beliefs of Hayek, who was a Classic Liberal. Yet there is not a whiff of ANY liberal beliefs in your bluster and rants.

I don't base my beliefs on theory, I base them experience and by being fortunate to live many years. I've seen the drastic shift to the right in America and the terrible consequences. I have lived through the drastic changes in this country brought about by the conservative revolution, the failed Reagan revolution and an economy and culture dominated by conservatives.

There is plenty of empiricism data that supports my claims. You just refuse to view or even consider anything that isn't played out daily in manic diatribes by Glenn Beck.