Yes.. Liberals DO want Socialism in America - [PROOF]

[editec]

It would truly help if some of you had a fucking clue what words mean.

Here's a hint..socialism means something very specific.

 

[Seawytch]

Okay, I'll fess up.

As a veteran, I love our "socialist" VA system and wish the rest of the country had it too. There you go, I admitted I want "socialism".

 

[Sallow]

Okay, I'll fess up.

As a veteran, I love our "socialist" VA system and wish the rest of the country had it too. There you go, I admitted I want "socialism".

Notice have the Connies have dropped out of the thread they started.

Mainly because they do not understand exactly what socialism is..

And that the very nature of ANY government is socialistic.

 

[Zoom-boing]

When the term socialism is used today it means 'authoritarianism', rather than the true meaning of socialism. Socialism today means 'moar government!'. Period.

Like how the term Liberal has been warped to today's meaning of the term 'liberal', which is a far cry from its original meaning.

And yes, both parties (in DC) want more 'socialism'.

 

[Daktoria]

Okay, I'll fess up.

As a veteran, I love our "socialist" VA system and wish the rest of the country had it too. There you go, I admitted I want "socialism".

Notice have the Connies have dropped out of the thread they started.

Mainly because they do not understand exactly what socialism is..

And that the very nature of ANY government is socialistic.

.....

Socialism is anarchism. No government is involved. Literally, the means of production are redistributed to the working class. There are no property rights. People are respected according to the use value of their concrete labor.

You don't sound like you understand what socialism is either.

 

[Daktoria]

When the term socialism is used today it means 'authoritarianism', rather than the true meaning of socialism. Socialism today means 'moar government!'. Period.

Like how the term Liberal has been warped to today's meaning of the term 'liberal', which is a far cry from its original meaning.

And yes, both parties (in DC) want more 'socialism'.

Is there a problem with how socialism is authoritarian? Do you believe rights come transcendentally from God?

 

[Sallow]

Okay, I'll fess up.

As a veteran, I love our "socialist" VA system and wish the rest of the country had it too. There you go, I admitted I want "socialism".

Notice have the Connies have dropped out of the thread they started.

Mainly because they do not understand exactly what socialism is..

And that the very nature of ANY government is socialistic.

.....

Socialism is anarchism. No government is involved. Literally, the means of production are redistributed to the working class. There are no property rights. People are respected according to the use value of their concrete labor.

You don't sound like you understand what socialism is either.

No.

It looks like you don't understand what it is..

What you are describing is a nutshell view of Communism.

 

[Daktoria]

Notice have the Connies have dropped out of the thread they started.

Mainly because they do not understand exactly what socialism is..

And that the very nature of ANY government is socialistic.

.....

Socialism is anarchism. No government is involved. Literally, the means of production are redistributed to the working class. There are no property rights. People are respected according to the use value of their concrete labor.

You don't sound like you understand what socialism is either.

No.

It looks like you don't understand what it is..

What you are describing is a nutshell view of Communism.

Socialism is a transitionary period from capitalism to communism. You cannot sustain a socialist paradigm without permanent revolution towards a communist end.

If you don't recognize the end of communism, then you don't recognize the value of what socialism stands for.

 

[Sallow]

When the term socialism is used today it means 'authoritarianism', rather than the true meaning of socialism. Socialism today means 'moar government!'. Period.

Like how the term Liberal has been warped to today's meaning of the term 'liberal', which is a far cry from its original meaning.

And yes, both parties (in DC) want more 'socialism'.

Is there a problem with how socialism is authoritarian? Do you believe rights come transcendentally from God?

Because Socialism isn't synonymous with authoritarian.

A good amount of the US constitution is socialist.

And nations like Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Germany and Britain put into practice, policies that are even more socialistic then the ones found in this country. As of today, those countries are not Authoritarian.

 

[Sallow]

.....

Socialism is anarchism. No government is involved. Literally, the means of production are redistributed to the working class. There are no property rights. People are respected according to the use value of their concrete labor.

You don't sound like you understand what socialism is either.

No.

It looks like you don't understand what it is..

What you are describing is a nutshell view of Communism.

Socialism is a transitionary period from capitalism to communism. You cannot sustain a socialist paradigm without permanent revolution towards a communist end.

If you don't recognize the end of communism, then you don't recognize the value of what socialism stands for.

Only if you are a Marxist.

 

[Daktoria]

When the term socialism is used today it means 'authoritarianism', rather than the true meaning of socialism. Socialism today means 'moar government!'. Period.

Like how the term Liberal has been warped to today's meaning of the term 'liberal', which is a far cry from its original meaning.

And yes, both parties (in DC) want more 'socialism'.

Is there a problem with how socialism is authoritarian? Do you believe rights come transcendentally from God?

Because Socialism isn't synonymous with authoritarian.

A good amount of the US constitution is socialist.

And nations like Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Germany and Britain put into practice, policies that are even more socialistic then the ones found in this country. As of today, those countries are not Authoritarian.

You can't be a socialist without dictating an appropriate definition of "use value" from "concrete labor".

That requires authority. The democratic notion of socialism is a facade. People must compete for authority in socialism to dictate what the proper definition of "use value" from "concrete labor" is.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gee, one video is 'proof' of a universal truth. Would anyone like to post other examples of elected official's personal opinions on women, rape and pregnancy? Do the vile comments directed at Sandra Fluke represent the values of all Republican? Do all Repubicans eschew contraceptives? Why doesn't the echo chamber think (can't or won't)?

 

[Agit8r]

People throw the words "socialism" and "communism" around too lightly. I recall reading a quote to a couple of workmates:

"The great object should be to combat the evil: 1. By establishing a political equality among all; 2. By witholding unnecessary opportunities from a few to increase the inequality of property by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches; 3. By the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort; 4. By abstaining from measures which operate differently on different interests, and particularly such as favor one interest at the expense of another; 5. By making one party a check on the other so far as the existence of parties cannot be prevented nor their views accommodated. If this is not the language of reason, it is that of republicanism."
-- James Madison; from 'Parties' (1792)

To which, one of them said "outside of the part about property, that sound like communism"

yeah, except for that tiny detail...

 

[Nole]

As a veteran, I love our "socialist" VA system and wish the rest of the country had it too. There you go, I admitted I want "socialism".

And here you have it in a nut shell people. But I digress, I think after the farce in Iraq we should have quadrupled down on VA benefits in liquid cash tax payers money for the brave Heroes who need it. Im saying dial up the socialism!!!

I admit, I am a product of the socialized school system. What do you expect me to think! DER!

 

[Sallow]

Is there a problem with how socialism is authoritarian? Do you believe rights come transcendentally from God?

Because Socialism isn't synonymous with authoritarian.

A good amount of the US constitution is socialist.

And nations like Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Germany and Britain put into practice, policies that are even more socialistic then the ones found in this country. As of today, those countries are not Authoritarian.

You can't be a socialist without dictating an appropriate definition of "use value" from "concrete labor".

That requires authority. The democratic notion of socialism is a facade. People must compete for authority in socialism to dictate what the proper definition of "use value" from "concrete labor" is.

Not really sure what you are advocating for here..

Anarchy?

All governments also have, in various degrees, elements of many forms of "isms". Does that mean that because of that..any government that practices an element of another form of government..it has become that form? Absolutely not.

Should we as citizens be mindful and guard against too much of anything? Well sure.

But if Anarchy is your intention?

No thanks.

Even the worst form of government is better than that.

 

[Daktoria]

Because Socialism isn't synonymous with authoritarian.

A good amount of the US constitution is socialist.

And nations like Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Germany and Britain put into practice, policies that are even more socialistic then the ones found in this country. As of today, those countries are not Authoritarian.

You can't be a socialist without dictating an appropriate definition of "use value" from "concrete labor".

That requires authority. The democratic notion of socialism is a facade. People must compete for authority in socialism to dictate what the proper definition of "use value" from "concrete labor" is.

Not really sure what you are advocating for here..

Anarchy?

All governments also have, in various degrees, elements of many forms of "isms". Does that mean that because of that..any government that practices an element of another form of government..it has become that form? Absolutely not.

Should we as citizens be mindful and guard against too much of anything? Well sure.

But if Anarchy is your intention?

No thanks.

Even the worst form of government is better than that.

Where does the legitimacy of government come from outside of property rights?

 

[bripat9643]

Where does the legitimacy of government come from outside of property rights?

Government has no legitimacy of any kind.

 

[tooAlive]

It seems as though everyone has a different definition of socialism. The left seems to believe that it is simply the government taking care of the poor. That's actually not quite it.

Lets see what Merriam Webster has to say about it, as I doubt anyone will argue that it's propaganda:

Socialism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

In a nutshell, this refers to the government having control over all corporations. They get to decide what the corporations produce, how much they charge, who runs the corporations, what wages are paid to employees and the hours they will work.

Countries around the world that have portrayed or still use this economic system include the USSR, North Korea, Nazi Germany, and Cuba. Just to name a few.

2.
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

Under socialism, all private property would be confiscated and belong to the state. They would then decide what to do with said properties. Theoretically, all private property would then be equally shared among the people.

3.
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Marx's ultimate goal was a classless, stateless, moneyless society. He and Engels originally referred to socialism and communism interchangeably. But since they couldn't just reach their "dream world" in one swing, socialism became their "transitional phase" from capitalism into communism. Which again, is their fantastical classless, stateless, moneyless society.

This is as basic as I can go. Hopefully this sheds some light on the true definitions of these words. And if you happen to think this is incorrect, please let me know so we can contact all dictionary and informational sites such as MW and ask them to correct their incorrect definitions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It seems as though everyone has a different definition of socialism. The left seems to believe that it is simply the government taking care of the poor. That's actually not quite it.

Lets see what Merriam Webster has to say about it, as I doubt anyone will argue that it's propaganda:

Socialism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

In a nutshell, this refers to the government having control over all corporations. They get to decide what the corporations produce, how much they charge, who runs the corporations, what wages are paid to employees and the hours they will work.

Countries around the world that have portrayed or still use this economic system include the USSR, North Korea, Nazi Germany, and Cuba. Just to name a few.

2.
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

Under socialism, all private property would be confiscated and belong to the state. They would then decide what to do with said properties. Theoretically, all private property would then be equally shared among the people.

3.
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Marx's ultimate goal was a classless, stateless, moneyless society. He and Engels originally referred to socialism and communism interchangeably. But since they couldn't just reach their "dream world" in one swing, socialism became their "transitional phase" from capitalism into communism. Which again, is their fantastical classless, stateless, moneyless society.

This is as basic as I can go. Hopefully this sheds some light on the true definitions of these words. And if you happen to think this is incorrect, please let me know so we can contact all dictionary and informational sites such as MW and ask them to correct their incorrect definitions.

All of which confirms the fact of the failure of your OP premise.

Liberals do not want ‘socialism’ in the United States.

Liberals are advocates of free market capitalism.

Liberals are advocates of private property rights.

Liberals are as much the whores of corporate America as conservatives.

Liberals have no desire to ‘nationalize’ any private business; the ACA and auto industry bail-outs are proof of that.

 

[tooAlive]

It seems as though everyone has a different definition of socialism. The left seems to believe that it is simply the government taking care of the poor. That's actually not quite it.

Lets see what Merriam Webster has to say about it, as I doubt anyone will argue that it's propaganda:

Socialism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

In a nutshell, this refers to the government having control over all corporations. They get to decide what the corporations produce, how much they charge, who runs the corporations, what wages are paid to employees and the hours they will work.

Countries around the world that have portrayed or still use this economic system include the USSR, North Korea, Nazi Germany, and Cuba. Just to name a few.



Under socialism, all private property would be confiscated and belong to the state. They would then decide what to do with said properties. Theoretically, all private property would then be equally shared among the people.

3.
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Marx's ultimate goal was a classless, stateless, moneyless society. He and Engels originally referred to socialism and communism interchangeably. But since they couldn't just reach their "dream world" in one swing, socialism became their "transitional phase" from capitalism into communism. Which again, is their fantastical classless, stateless, moneyless society.

This is as basic as I can go. Hopefully this sheds some light on the true definitions of these words. And if you happen to think this is incorrect, please let me know so we can contact all dictionary and informational sites such as MW and ask them to correct their incorrect definitions.

All of which confirms the fact of the failure of your OP premise.

Liberals do not want ‘socialism’ in the United States.

Liberals are advocates of free market capitalism.

Liberals are advocates of private property rights.

Liberals are as much the whores of corporate America as conservatives.

Liberals have no desire to ‘nationalize’ any private business; the ACA and auto industry bail-outs are proof of that.

Agreed, my OP was a bit exaggerated in that it implied liberals really do want the things I outlined above.

It was mainly an attempt to get them to understand what socialism really is, as I hear countless liberals proclaiming their love for "socialism" when they really don't know what they're saying.

And I wouldn't consider Maxine Waters to be a liberal either; she's more of a far-left socialist.