Why The Left Loves Socialism

[danielpalos]

You've already shown how wealth attracts more wealth so your response is completely disingenuous.

Some people's idea of getting things done is to put intense pressure on the people who know how to do things. Others take pride in knowing how to do things. Your assertion is that the people who know how to do things prefer socialism because they lack the confidence to compete. I would counter that by saying that you prefer capitalism because you lack the confidence that you could produce something of value on your own.

Huh?

Again, you're not making a lick of sense here.

First of all, no... I haven't shown how wealth attracts more wealth. You made that statement and you've not backed it up. I said it was a nonsensical statement because wealth is inanimate. Can a person who has wealth, use that wealth to create even more wealth? Sure. Is that what you meant? That's not the wealth attracting more wealth, that's someone utilizing their noodle... something you apparently have trouble with.

Second... what the hell is this "how to do things" argument? I think most people, unless they are imbeciles, know how to "do things," don't they? I've never met someone who didn't know how to do anything unless they were severely retarded or something.

MY assertion is: People who prefer Socialism lack the confidence in their ability to compete with others. Why do I have to keep repeating this and correcting your misinterpretations?

I don't prefer Socialism because I don't lack confidence in my ability to compete with others. I know that as long as I have a free market capitalist system and free enterprise, I can attain as much wealth as I desire, the sky is the limit. There has never been a point in my life where I was broke and felt like there was no hope. There have been plenty of times when I had little or no money on hand but I have always had confidence I could make money. There have been times when I had to do without things, times I couldn't catch a break, times when things looked bad... I always had confidence in my ability to compete with others.

This thread has obviously struck a nerve with lefties who adore Socialism. It is hitting a little too close to home for you and you don't know how to confront it. Some of you try to derail the topic, some of you want to use the thread to lobby for your failed ideas, some of you want to twist and distort my comments into something else, some want to make nonsensical arguments and some of you are simply in denial and refuse to accept my point. I'm not under any delusion that I can help you if you refuse to be helped. I'm simply pointing out what I have observed and letting others know why some people are so committed to their Socialist ideology.

Not at all; my point, in the Age of Corporate Welfare; is that it is merely easier and more convenient, with a social bailout. Unemployment compensation is a, case in point. It should be as easy to apply for unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed in our at-will employment States, as it is to apply for a job or easier.

 

[Boss]

Not at all; my point, in the Age of Corporate Welfare; is that it is merely easier and more convenient, with a social bailout. Unemployment compensation is a, case in point. It should be as easy to apply for unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed in our at-will employment States, as it is to apply for a job or easier.

Well this is an easy argument for anyone to make who favors Socialism. If you lack the confidence in your ability to climb a few flights of stairs, you can certainly claim the elevator is more convenient... because it is. No one can argue that point. However, I shouldn't be forced to pay for your elevator and all its maintenance when I have confidence in my ability to climb the stairs and I actually think it's preferable because it's more healthy and less expensive.

As for corporate welfare, that happens as a result of corporatist collusion with a government that has too much power. Socialism grants government exponentially more power, therefore collusion and corruption is even more pronounced.

 

[JoeNormal]

You've already shown how wealth attracts more wealth so your response is completely disingenuous.

Some people's idea of getting things done is to put intense pressure on the people who know how to do things. Others take pride in knowing how to do things. Your assertion is that the people who know how to do things prefer socialism because they lack the confidence to compete. I would counter that by saying that you prefer capitalism because you lack the confidence that you could produce something of value on your own.

Huh?

Again, you're not making a lick of sense here.

First of all, no... I haven't shown how wealth attracts more wealth. You made that statement and you've not backed it up. I said it was a nonsensical statement because wealth is inanimate. Can a person who has wealth, use that wealth to create even more wealth? Sure. Is that what you meant? That's not the wealth attracting more wealth, that's someone utilizing their noodle... something you apparently have trouble with.

Second... what the hell is this "how to do things" argument? I think most people, unless they are imbeciles, know how to "do things," don't they? I've never met someone who didn't know how to do anything unless they were severely retarded or something.

MY assertion is: People who prefer Socialism lack the confidence in their ability to compete with others. Why do I have to keep repeating this and correcting your misinterpretations?

I don't prefer Socialism because I don't lack confidence in my ability to compete with others. I know that as long as I have a free market capitalist system and free enterprise, I can attain as much wealth as I desire, the sky is the limit. There has never been a point in my life where I was broke and felt like there was no hope. There have been plenty of times when I had little or no money on hand but I have always had confidence I could make money. There have been times when I had to do without things, times I couldn't catch a break, times when things looked bad... I always had confidence in my ability to compete with others.

This thread has obviously struck a nerve with lefties who adore Socialism. It is hitting a little too close to home for you and you don't know how to confront it. Some of you try to derail the topic, some of you want to use the thread to lobby for your failed ideas, some of you want to twist and distort my comments into something else, some want to make nonsensical arguments and some of you are simply in denial and refuse to accept my point. I'm not under any delusion that I can help you if you refuse to be helped. I'm simply pointing out what I have observed and letting others know why some people are so committed to their Socialist ideology.

I've always given the authors of posts like yours the benefit of the doubt as to what they do and don't understand about the point that was being explained to them. Therefore, I'll chalk this one up to you being disingenuous rather than dim witted.

'Knowing how to do things' implies specialized knowledge (as if you didn't know). Many (most?) managers come up way short on ANY kind of remotely specialized knowledge or skill. It could be anything from basic plumbing to creating a deep knowledge system. They make up for it, or at least try to by exerting pressure, using threats or denying privileges. I've personally experienced the gamut of these types throughout my career.

In their minds, the ability to negotiate trumps all others when in reality, in a highly technological and specialized society, we need all types of experts, not just those skilled in negotiation. It's your choice if you want to be dependent upon others to do the simplest of specialized tasks but it makes me uncomfortable.

 

[danielpalos]

Not at all; my point, in the Age of Corporate Welfare; is that it is merely easier and more convenient, with a social bailout. Unemployment compensation is a, case in point. It should be as easy to apply for unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed in our at-will employment States, as it is to apply for a job or easier.

Well this is an easy argument for anyone to make who favors Socialism. If you lack the confidence in your ability to climb a few flights of stairs, you can certainly claim the elevator is more convenient... because it is. No one can argue that point. However, I shouldn't be forced to pay for your elevator and all its maintenance when I have confidence in my ability to climb the stairs and I actually think it's preferable because it's more healthy and less expensive.

As for corporate welfare, that happens as a result of corporatist collusion with a government that has too much power. Socialism grants government exponentially more power, therefore collusion and corruption is even more pronounced.

not at all; it is about reducing crony forms of capitalism, alleged to be "competition".

 

[Boss]

not at all; it is about reducing crony forms of capitalism, alleged to be "competition".

Well, Socialism is 100% crony corporatism devoid of ANY free market capitalism. Socialism prohibits private property rights and restricts free enterprise. Therefore, the only type of capitalism that can exist is corporatism.

 

[Boss]

I've always given the authors of posts like yours the benefit of the doubt as to what they do and don't understand about the point that was being explained to them. Therefore, I'll chalk this one up to you being disingenuous rather than dim witted.

'Knowing how to do things' implies specialized knowledge (as if you didn't know). Many (most?) managers come up way short on ANY kind of remotely specialized knowledge or skill. It could be anything from basic plumbing to creating a deep knowledge system. They make up for it, or at least try to by exerting pressure, using threats or denying privileges. I've personally experienced the gamut of these types throughout my career.

In their minds, the ability to negotiate trumps all others when in reality, in a highly technological and specialized society, we need all types of experts, not just those skilled in negotiation. It's your choice if you want to be dependent upon others to do the simplest of specialized tasks but it makes me uncomfortable.

I appreciate you giving me the benefit of the doubt. I've never been much good at knowing what people mean when they don't clarify what they mean. I'm neither disingenuous or dim witted, I'm just not very clairvoyant. When I read "people who know how to do things" I have to assume, as opposed to people who don't know how to do things, and I don't know of any people in productive society who fit that bill. Everyone knows how to do things.

Now that you've kind of explained what you meant, I understand you're talking about incompetent management. But here's the thing, that's precisely why free market capitalism is so great. If my company has managers who do know "how to do things" comes across your company full of incompetent managers, guess who's lunch is going to get eaten and who is going to walk away with the market share? That is, unless your company is being protected by it's corporatist allies in the government who can step in and proclaim it "too big to fail."

If free market capitalism is allowed to function, your company of incompetent managers is going to fail. Not some of the time but every time. My company might even absorb some of that companies more competent employees who "know how to do things" and they may one day become managers for me. Because, you see, I don't promote managers who don't "know how to do things."

But what is ironic is, you support Socialism, which is basically a bunch of politicians and bureaucrats running businesses they know nothing about. Making business decisions based on emotionalism and populism rather than knowledge of the function and objectives of the industry itself.

 

[danielpalos]

not at all; it is about reducing crony forms of capitalism, alleged to be "competition".

Well, Socialism is 100% crony corporatism devoid of ANY free market capitalism. Socialism prohibits private property rights and restricts free enterprise. Therefore, the only type of capitalism that can exist is corporatism.

why do we have a first world economy, that is mixed, part socialism and part capitalism, if capitalism is so wonderful?

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been, bailing it out, ever since.

 

[Boss]

why do we have a first world economy, that is mixed, part socialism and part capitalism, if capitalism is so wonderful?

capitalism died in 1929 and socialism has been, bailing it out, ever since.

Well, what has happened is, a lot of people have been propagandized into thinking that we have some sort of "mixed" system when we don't. Yes, many socialist type policies have been enacted since 1929, mostly through a gross misinterpretation of the "general welfare" clause and the commerce clause. That does not make us part Socialist.

Furthermore, there are certain things our founders forged into the Constitution as enumerated powers of government because they realized free market capitalism couldn't provide them effectively because the incentives were all wrong. So this goes back to the non sequitur argument made earlier, there is no such thing as a "pure" system of any kind.

Now.... this thread is not intended to be a pom-pom session for Capitalism OR Socialism. There are probably a thousand such threads already on the various boards at USMB, where the merits of Socialism and Capitalism is being argued. So there is really no point in repeating those same arguments here in yet another thread. But we keep ending up having those types of posts for some reason and no one can stick with the OP. The intention and purpose of the thread is to discuss WHY certain people like or embrace Socialism as opposed to those who don't. What is it about Socialism that appeals to certain people?

In the OP, I make the argument that I believe it is because those people simply lack confidence in their ability to compete with others. There have been over 100 replies and the only counter-arguments presented seem to reinforce the OP conclusions. Naturally, people try to justify their beliefs and phrase it differently, but when all is said and done, it boils down to an underlying lack of confidence in ability to compete.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, Government is Socialism. Only the right wing, never gets it.

 

[Boss]

dear, Government is Socialism. Only the right wing, never gets it.

So you're NOT going to address the OP topic?

 

[danielpalos]

dear, Government is Socialism. Only the right wing, never gets it.

So you're NOT going to address the OP topic?

that is why the left loves socialism. all the right has to offer, is anarchy, by comparison.

 

[bripat9643]

I liked being in a socialist organization, the military...

Except the military is not a socialist organization.

Sorry... it's just NOT.

Of course it is.

 

[bripat9643]

dear, Government is Socialism. Only the right wing, never gets it.

So you're NOT going to address the OP topic?

that is why the left loves socialism. all the right has to offer, is anarchy, by comparison.

Is that the epithet you use to refer to freedom? We can't allow people to go around making their own decisions. That's anarchy!

 

[Desperado]

I liked being in a socialist organization, the military...

Except the military is not a socialist organization.

Sorry... it's just NOT.

No the Military is very much a socialist society

 

[bripat9643]

I liked being in a socialist organization, the military...

Except the military is not a socialist organization.

Sorry... it's just NOT.

When did you serve? Because it is a socialist organization...The farmer analogy is a dictatorship...

No, it's NOT a socialist organization in any aspect. If you had to compare it with a governmental organization it would be totalitarian fascism. Nothing in the military is ever done for the collective, including the oath you take to serve. If the military were socialist you wouldn't have ranks, all ranks would be the same, everyone working for a common cause. Pay would be the same, duties would essentially be the same. And if it were socialist, all this would be happening to serve the common good of the group, but the military doesn't serve it's own interest, it serves the interest of the country, by it's very definition.

So you can CALL it that if you like, but it's no different than you calling it a ham sandwich... it only demonstrates what a moron you are.

He said it was socialism, not communism.

 

[bripat9643]

This OP might be a little wordy, so I will go ahead and tell you, if you don't like wordy OPs, you may want to pass this one up and move along. It is intended to address a burning question that many on the right side of the political spectrum have had for a while about the left's fascination with socialism and socialist policies. To answer tough questions, it sometimes takes more than a paragraph. So, forgive me for the length and try to muddle through to glean the overall point.

I watched an old movie the other day. It was from 1949, called The Green Promise, starring a young Natalie Wood as a child and a middle-aged Walter Brennan as her father. In the story, he was a widower with 4 children, three daughters and a son, and he was a farmer. The five of them worked together to make their farm life work and the father was really big on having these "family meetings" where they would routinely vote on various issues and decisions. At first, this is presented as a proud and virtuous way to handle things, democracy in action as opposed to the iron-fisted tyranny of the father. Everyone working together for the common good. It was the perfect model of Democratic Socialism in every respect.

Okay... So the youngest daughter (Natalie Wood), meets this young boy her age, I am guessing they are around 12-13ish... His name is Buzz. Now, Buzz has done very well for himself at his young age. He has a herd of cattle and a prize bull worth over $1,000. He started with two calves his father sold him on credit, which he has long since paid for. She admires he has done this on his own at his age, and she starts thinking about doing the same thing with a couple of lambs. One of the protagonists in the story is a County Extension Agent who is trying to help the farmers in his community with advice and mentors to the young people by introducing them to the 4-H Club. He kind of puts the notion in the young daughter's head that she can do the same thing as Buzz and raise two lambs into her own flock of sheep.

Her oldest sister is kind of taking on the role of matriarch, is on her side. She explains how she understands how it's important for her to do this because it's her individuality and sense of self-accomplishment. The middle sister is unsympathetic because she is a suck-up to the father for attention. So this issue of her getting two lambs to raise on her own finally comes to a "family meeting" where a vote will be cast on what they should do. The father has his mind set on purchasing a tractor, even though it's something they really can't afford. And this is where the model of Democratic Socialism goes awry.

The father begins the meeting with a little lecture to his young daughter that her idea of raising two lambs on her own is selfish and it must be because she doesn't love the rest of her family. Greed is the only reason he can see for her wanting to do this. He then demands the family show hands if they oppose the idea. The older daughter speaks up, asking why not show hands in favor first, and he quickly shoots back... it doesn't matter! Of course, he has already raised his hand in opposition, and the suck-up middle daughter raises her hand. His son, sits there contemplating the situation... he is going to be the deciding vote and he has to live with his dad. You can tell that he begrudgingly votes with the dad, which seals the deal. The father goes on to lobby through his idea of buying a tractor and the little girl's dream is crushed.

Now, as fate would have it, the father is injured severely on the farm and the older daughter has to take over running the farm. So she ends up approving the young daughter's plan if she can raise the money to buy the initial lambs. She does so with the help of the County Extension Agent. A lot of other things take place as well but the father finally comes to realize the error of his ways and this is where I gained some insight into why I believe the left is so fascinated with Socialism, and why most people are so enamored.

In his confessional, he admits that his reluctance to allow his children to be independent, the reason he insisted on everyone working together as a cooperative unit, was because he was afraid to compete, afraid of his own lack of ability. As long as everyone was working for the common cause, he felt secure, he didn't have to worry about being left alone to fend for himself. This is where I realized what lies behind this modern Democrat Socialist view of the world and what is motivating it. These are people who are afraid to compete as individuals because they have no confidence in their own ability. They feel more secure as part of a supporting cast who can carry most of the load and where their underachievement can be hidden. They are unwilling to let that go, even though it stifles individuality and sense of self-accomplishment for others.

It's mostly never having lived under real Socialism, maybe it's a form of ignorance

Socialism in the USA began with FDR.

We found back in those days that businesses were getting monopolistic and too big to fail.

What we found is that government meddling in the financial industry leads to financial collapse, and then continued meddling in the economy leads to a long depression.

 

[bripat9643]

Considering Americans don't even have a socialist party I would say they don't love it all. A better question might be why are right wingers so paranoid and afraid of socialism?

Now why would Purple Owl lie, other than that is typical of Marxism/Socialism/Fascism/Liberalism/Progressivism? They even have their own website. I think soon, that there will be a war like the one back in the late 1800's between ideology. Those that believe in God and Guns against those who believe in government and don't like guns. Guess who will win?


Socialist Party USA - Home

THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society... where working people own and control the means of production and distribution through democratically-controlled public agencies, cooperatives, or other collective groups.; where full employment is realized for everyone who wants to work; where workers have the right to form unions freely, and to strike and engage in other forms of job actions; and where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. We believe socialism and democracy are one and indivisible...

Just shows how stupid people have to be, to believe that Socialism would be good for them.

Of course socialism always ends the same way, just look at Venezuela.

View attachment 106273

there is also an american nazi party..... why does the right love fascism?

The American Nazi's are currently CNN.

Trump said so in his press conference today.

They may not be Nazis, but they are nothing more than the propaganda arm of the DNC.

 

[bripat9643]

Considering Americans don't even have a socialist party I would say they don't love it all. A better question might be why are right wingers so paranoid and afraid of socialism?

Now why would Purple Owl lie, other than that is typical of Marxism/Socialism/Fascism/Liberalism/Progressivism? They even have their own website. I think soon, that there will be a war like the one back in the late 1800's between ideology. Those that believe in God and Guns against those who believe in government and don't like guns. Guess who will win?


Socialist Party USA - Home

THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society... where working people own and control the means of production and distribution through democratically-controlled public agencies, cooperatives, or other collective groups.; where full employment is realized for everyone who wants to work; where workers have the right to form unions freely, and to strike and engage in other forms of job actions; and where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. We believe socialism and democracy are one and indivisible...

Just shows how stupid people have to be, to believe that Socialism would be good for them.

Of course socialism always ends the same way, just look at Venezuela.

View attachment 106273

there is also an american nazi party..... why does the right love fascism?

Check the roles on The American Nazi Party. They are full of liberals and Dems.
Same with The KKK. Founded by Dems, populated by Dems, supported by Dems.
Dems are closet racists and bigots who had to go underground after The GOP passed The Civil Rights Act.

That Nazis in this forum support the same economic agenda as leftwing Democrats.

 

[bripat9643]

Considering Americans don't even have a socialist party I would say they don't love it all. A better question might be why are right wingers so paranoid and afraid of socialism?

Now why would Purple Owl lie, other than that is typical of Marxism/Socialism/Fascism/Liberalism/Progressivism? They even have their own website. I think soon, that there will be a war like the one back in the late 1800's between ideology. Those that believe in God and Guns against those who believe in government and don't like guns. Guess who will win?


Socialist Party USA - Home

THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society... where working people own and control the means of production and distribution through democratically-controlled public agencies, cooperatives, or other collective groups.; where full employment is realized for everyone who wants to work; where workers have the right to form unions freely, and to strike and engage in other forms of job actions; and where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. We believe socialism and democracy are one and indivisible...

Just shows how stupid people have to be, to believe that Socialism would be good for them.

Of course socialism always ends the same way, just look at Venezuela.

View attachment 106273

there is also an american nazi party..... why does the right love fascism?

Check the roles on The American Nazi Party. They are full of liberals and Dems.
Same with The KKK. Founded by Dems, populated by Dems, supported by Dems.
Dems are closet racists and bigots who had to go underground after The GOP passed The Civil Rights Act.

they switched sides after the civil rights act everyone knows that.... fascism is right wing as all dictionaries and encyclopedia say and other than not liking to be affiliated with genocide your a fascist

Fake history.

 

[bripat9643]

Socialism has never worked....and never will. Econ 101

It actually does work for a while. In the movie it worked very well for a while. Like I said, it was proudly considered virtuous and noble... democracy in action... everyone working together for the common good of the group. What it ultimately did was crush individuality and sense of self-accomplishment.

The Left will proudly showcase the European countries in Scandinavia as these marvelous examples of socialism working... and they will work for 20-30 years in some cases. Eventually, even they will fail.

When you crush individuality and the sense of self-accomplishment, you crush the human spirit... and it's all downhill from there. We know this from experience, the historical record is rife with examples. Trouble is, the Socialists refuse to accept the truth and continue to make excuses for their dismal track record... oh, there was corruption, or this shouldn't have been allowed to happen, or that was the problem but we've FIXED it now... and every generation or so, they trot out a new incarnation of the same failed idea.

^^^ this is the common mythology of the GOP, Tory, Far Right John Birchers.

They just don't want to pay taxes.

They are greedy to the gills.

It is a vice.

And for some reason they think that US citizens in the US never paid taxes before the Volstead Act passed, which caused income taxes had to be enacted to cover the loss of taxes on booze...

The income tax was passed before prohibition.