Calling It a New Name Won't Make Socialism Work

[Rustic]

But it’s never been implemented properly before – this time around. I’m sure top people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will succeed where Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Maduro, etc. have failed.


SORRY, DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS — YOU’RE STILL PUSHING POISON.

I happen to know a little something about the transfer of private industry to government control. My grandmother’s father had his bakery seized in the Soviet city of Gomel. He was sent to a gulag, where he then died.

Oh, that’s crazy, Democratic Socialists would respond. No one is planning to seize bakeries. And no one will be sent to prison for owning a business.

No? What if those who own companies in industries that “necessitate some form of state ownership” don’t want to give them up willingly? What happens when the state runs out of money from the industries seized and needs more?

It’s baffling how we can still be considering centralized control of industries when that has never worked anywhere. And how socialism lovers so easily dismiss the underlying foundation in countries that have veered toward some form of that system: capitalism. Countries such as Norway, for example, are helped by a large abundance of natural resources and an essentially capitalist system supporting the welfare state.

On the other hand, nations where socialism continues to wreak havoc and spur poverty, disease and crime, like Venezuela, don’t have much support from capitalism. Fact is, “socialism” only works when it’s paid for by capitalism.

* * * * * * * *

In the fall of 1959, Nikita Khrushchev gave a series of speeches here. In one, he said, “We are catching up with you in economic progress, and the time is not far distant when we will move into the lead.” In Russia, that prompted folks to joke: “When we finally catch up to America, can I get off?”

Do you understand the difference between democratic socialism and socialism or do you think they are the same thing?

Venezuela shows what adding "Democratic" accomplishes.

The Nordic countries are nothing like Venezuela. Bernie and his followers do not want us to be like Venezuela. Bernie has never advocated for anything the Nordic countries are not already doing.

We don’t want Nordic socialism over here, because the collective will **** us over

 

[Some Guy]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

True. But...

Are they proposing more regulation of various industries and markets rather than less? Yes.
Are they proposing higher corporate taxes? Yes.

Regulations influence or dictate how businesses run and taxes obviously take operating expenses away from them. They are very transparent about wanting more influence on how commerce is done in the U.S., not less. Pair that with their transparent desire for giant government funded programs at extremely high costs and it's very hard to take them at their word.

"More" of this or that? Yes, absolutely.

What is continually lost (or ignored) in this discussion (and others), though, is the fact this stuff lies along a continuum. Any country is going to have a degree of socialism in it, the question is how much. It's not "socialist or not socialist".
.

Agreed. And i think it's fair to say that the more a system is socialized, the less sustainable it becomes. As soon as a certain output is guaranteed, there's no motivation to keep up the same level of inputs.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I wish Republicans could get their shit straight.

Just for the record, are the Nordic countries socialist in your opinion, or no?

Don't ask me ask them.

Danish PM in US: Denmark is not socialist

So your answer is not just no, but hell no.

 

[Confounding]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

True. But...

Are they proposing more regulation of various industries and markets rather than less? Yes.
Are they proposing higher corporate taxes? Yes.

Regulations influence or dictate how businesses run and taxes obviously take operating expenses away from them. They are very transparent about wanting more influence on how commerce is done in the U.S., not less. Pair that with their transparent desire for giant government funded programs at extremely high costs and it's very hard to take them at their word.

Why not be honest and call it what it is, or don't call it what it's not? Higher taxes and social programs is not socialism.

"Socialism" is just a concept of socializing resources. It can be applied to anything where there's more than one person involved. If you go out to lunch with 9 colleagues and just say "split the check evenly 10 ways" regardless of what was ordered by each person, then that's socialism of the cost of the lunch. To that end, i would agree that people on the right use the term like a boogeyman when it's convenient for them to. They're referring to economic socialism but calling it just "socialism."

At that point, i'd just refer you to the above. I don't trust people who call themselves "democratic socialists" when they say they don't want to socialize America's economy. They rarely have seen regulations they don't like and tend to think that every problem can be solved by taxing people more and creating a government program for it. As said above, that's further government control of the economy. The more powerful and intrusive government gets, the more powerful and intrusive the government will want to get.

The Nordic countries have no homelessness and they are the happiest nations on Earth. Their people are healthy, educated and have a very long average life span. It seems to be working great for them.

 

[Slade3200]

Do you consider taxation as socialism?

I consider all forms of socialism to be “someone else pays for my shit”

So is that a yes to taxation? You think that is socialism?

The collective controls the individual… That is the definition of socialism

Wrong again. Socialism is when the community owns or regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange

I’ll simplify it for you then... the collective tells you what to do and you better do it…

So do laws and the police. Are you against those too?

 

[forkup]

I disagree.

All socialism needs is rebranding.

I think that renaming it "Happy Unicorn Fantasy Socioeconomic System" will make people more readily accept socialism and make it work this time.

Yep, But I have a simpler name… “Someone else pay for my shit” ...

Yes and that simpler name would be wrong. If everybody pays more taxes then it wouldn't be someone else now would it?

Socialism by definition is someone else will pick up the tab

No, socialism is by definition is everybody contributes to the system. Those who can afford more pay more, but everyone contributes. I'm European, my wife is American care to compare standard of living between middle class people?

See you are not understanding the problem, socialism the way you define it is absolutely unacceptable to the freedom loving individual. That is bullshit that better off people have to take care of the worst off people… They should do it voluntarily but never be forced into that world a ******* piss and shit.

Know anything about the start of the industrial revolution? The argument you just made is the same reaction the church had when workers demanded more rights. They said that the answer to the tremendous inequality between the classes of people could only be solved by charity. And by no means should those workers get any political rights. Those workers organizing was the birth of Socialism and universal suffrage. It's insane that this is were America has regressed to. The arguments of the elite in the late 19th century.

 

[Confounding]

I wish Republicans could get their shit straight.

Just for the record, are the Nordic countries socialist in your opinion, or no?

Don't ask mem ask them.

Danish PM in US: Denmark is not socialist
So your answer is not just no, but hell no.

Oh good, so Bernie and his people are not socialist either. Republicans call people communist for wanting universal healthcare. You guys are the ones ******* the labels up and muddying the water.

 

[Rustic]

I consider all forms of socialism to be “someone else pays for my shit”

So is that a yes to taxation? You think that is socialism?

The collective controls the individual… That is the definition of socialism

Wrong again. Socialism is when the community owns or regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange

I’ll simplify it for you then... the collective tells you what to do and you better do it…

So do laws and the police. Are you against those too?

Military, police and fire are an necessary... And progressives hate those obviously by the way they treat them.
The rest of big government is not necessary

 

[Weatherman2020]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

Have any evidence they're not?

 

[Rustic]

Yep, But I have a simpler name… “Someone else pay for my shit” ...

Yes and that simpler name would be wrong. If everybody pays more taxes then it wouldn't be someone else now would it?

Socialism by definition is someone else will pick up the tab

No, socialism is by definition is everybody contributes to the system. Those who can afford more pay more, but everyone contributes. I'm European, my wife is American care to compare standard of living between middle class people?

See you are not understanding the problem, socialism the way you define it is absolutely unacceptable to the freedom loving individual. That is bullshit that better off people have to take care of the worst off people… They should do it voluntarily but never be forced into that world a ******* piss and shit.

Know anything about the start of the industrial revolution? The argument you just made is the same reaction the church had when workers demanded more rights. They said that the answer to the tremendous inequality between the classes of people could only be solved by charity. And by no means should those workers get any political rights. Those workers organizing was the birth of Socialism and universal suffrage. It's insane that this is were America has regressed to. The arguments of the elite in the late 19th century.

Rural America is doing fine...
Progressive controlled urban America is what’s fucked up beyond repair

 

[forkup]

Do you consider taxation as socialism?

I consider all forms of socialism to be “someone else pays for my shit”

So is that a yes to taxation? You think that is socialism?

The collective controls the individual… That is the definition of socialism

You can't just redefine a word because you don't want to argue the point. I live in an European country. What freedom you imagine you have that I don't?

You’re forced into a collective with socialism whether you want to or not… **** the collective

Sure that was an answer to something, just not what I asked. Name a freedom you have that I don't? I for sure can give a freedom I have that you don't. I can send my kid to any school I choose, we don't have any school districts. Your turn.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I wish Republicans could get their shit straight.

Just for the record, are the Nordic countries socialist in your opinion, or no?

Don't ask mem ask them.

Danish PM in US: Denmark is not socialist
So your answer is not just no, but hell no.

Oh good, so Bernie and his people are not socialist either. Republicans call people communist for wanting universal healthcare. You guys are the ones ******* the labels up and muddying the water.

You're not very versed in current events I see.

Bernie Sanders: Why I'm a Democratic Socialist - CNN Video

 

[Confounding]

Know anything about the start of the industrial revolution? The argument you just made is the same reaction the church had when workers demanded more rights. They said that the answer to the tremendous inequality between the classes of people could only be solved by charity. And by no means should those workers get any political rights. Those workers organizing was the birth of Socialism and universal suffrage. It's insane that this is were America has regressed to. The arguments of the elite in the late 19th century.

Are you implying that charity alone can't solve the problems society faces?! COMMUNIST!

 

[Rustic]

I consider all forms of socialism to be “someone else pays for my shit”

So is that a yes to taxation? You think that is socialism?

The collective controls the individual… That is the definition of socialism

You can't just redefine a word because you don't want to argue the point. I live in an European country. What freedom you imagine you have that I don't?

You’re forced into a collective with socialism whether you want to or not… **** the collective

Sure that was an answer to something, just not what I asked. Name a freedom you have that I don't? I for sure can give a freedom I have that you don't. I can send my kid to any school I choose, we don't have any school districts. Your turn.

There is no real freedom in the world today, obviously.

 

[Some Guy]

So we're still pretending the Democrats are pushing 100%, full-blown socialism, in which private property is eliminated and government owns all means of production and distribution.

Okay, sure, why not.
.

True. But...

Are they proposing more regulation of various industries and markets rather than less? Yes.
Are they proposing higher corporate taxes? Yes.

Regulations influence or dictate how businesses run and taxes obviously take operating expenses away from them. They are very transparent about wanting more influence on how commerce is done in the U.S., not less. Pair that with their transparent desire for giant government funded programs at extremely high costs and it's very hard to take them at their word.

Why not be honest and call it what it is, or don't call it what it's not? Higher taxes and social programs is not socialism.

"Socialism" is just a concept of socializing resources. It can be applied to anything where there's more than one person involved. If you go out to lunch with 9 colleagues and just say "split the check evenly 10 ways" regardless of what was ordered by each person, then that's socialism of the cost of the lunch. To that end, i would agree that people on the right use the term like a boogeyman when it's convenient for them to. They're referring to economic socialism but calling it just "socialism."

At that point, i'd just refer you to the above. I don't trust people who call themselves "democratic socialists" when they say they don't want to socialize America's economy. They rarely have seen regulations they don't like and tend to think that every problem can be solved by taxing people more and creating a government program for it. As said above, that's further government control of the economy. The more powerful and intrusive government gets, the more powerful and intrusive the government will want to get.

The Nordic countries have no homelessness and they are the happiest nations on Earth. Their people are healthy, educated and have a very long average life span. It seems to be working great for them.

Good for them. However, that's all due to culture, not socialism. Their average lifespan has moreso stagnated than lengthened since they embraced a welfare state compared to other countries. And i don't think their food marketplace has become as saturated with sugary processed foods like ours has, but that could possible be attributed to their education as well. Healthier lifestyle = less burden on the healthcare system.

Of course, all that ignores how small and homogeneous their populations are. The advent of such systems to a much larger, diverse and distributed population is a different animal entirely.

 

[Rustic]

With socialism the goal is everyone lives in equal misery… And better love it

 

[Confounding]

I wish Republicans could get their shit straight.

Just for the record, are the Nordic countries socialist in your opinion, or no?

Don't ask mem ask them.

Danish PM in US: Denmark is not socialist
So your answer is not just no, but hell no.

Oh good, so Bernie and his people are not socialist either. Republicans call people communist for wanting universal healthcare. You guys are the ones ******* the labels up and muddying the water.

You're not very versed in current events I see.

bernie says he is socialist - Bing video

Name one single policy or position of Bernie Sanders that is not in line with what Nordic countries do. Just one, EVER. You can't. Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist. He supports Nordic capitalism. You people are the ones perverting the labels. If you think Bernie wants to destroy capitalism and emulate Venezuela you are completely misinformed.

 

[Slade3200]

So is that a yes to taxation? You think that is socialism?

The collective controls the individual… That is the definition of socialism

Wrong again. Socialism is when the community owns or regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange

I’ll simplify it for you then... the collective tells you what to do and you better do it…

So do laws and the police. Are you against those too?

Military, police and fire are an necessary... And progressives hate those obviously by the way they treat them.
The rest of big government is not necessary

You’re done. You can’t go on these platitude rants about freedom and ******* the collective and then say well certain ones that I like are ok. That makes you a hypocrite. If your ok with military and law and order then then you believe that the contributions of the collective serve a purpose. So stop with your bullshit. You can argue about specific programs that you disagree with but right now you aren’t being intellectually honest.

 

[forkup]

Yes and that simpler name would be wrong. If everybody pays more taxes then it wouldn't be someone else now would it?

Socialism by definition is someone else will pick up the tab

No, socialism is by definition is everybody contributes to the system. Those who can afford more pay more, but everyone contributes. I'm European, my wife is American care to compare standard of living between middle class people?

See you are not understanding the problem, socialism the way you define it is absolutely unacceptable to the freedom loving individual. That is bullshit that better off people have to take care of the worst off people… They should do it voluntarily but never be forced into that world a ******* piss and shit.

Know anything about the start of the industrial revolution? The argument you just made is the same reaction the church had when workers demanded more rights. They said that the answer to the tremendous inequality between the classes of people could only be solved by charity. And by no means should those workers get any political rights. Those workers organizing was the birth of Socialism and universal suffrage. It's insane that this is were America has regressed to. The arguments of the elite in the late 19th century.

Rural America is doing fine...
Progressive controlled urban America is what’s fucked up beyond repair

Tell that to Appalachia, or any of the Southern States. This is how fine looks like to you?List of U.S. states and territories by life expectancy - Wikipedia
Seems that if you want to die sooner you need to be in rural America.

 

[Darkwind]

But it’s never been implemented properly before – this time around. I’m sure top people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will succeed where Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Maduro, etc. have failed.


SORRY, DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS — YOU’RE STILL PUSHING POISON.

I happen to know a little something about the transfer of private industry to government control. My grandmother’s father had his bakery seized in the Soviet city of Gomel. He was sent to a gulag, where he then died.

Oh, that’s crazy, Democratic Socialists would respond. No one is planning to seize bakeries. And no one will be sent to prison for owning a business.

No? What if those who own companies in industries that “necessitate some form of state ownership” don’t want to give them up willingly? What happens when the state runs out of money from the industries seized and needs more?

It’s baffling how we can still be considering centralized control of industries when that has never worked anywhere. And how socialism lovers so easily dismiss the underlying foundation in countries that have veered toward some form of that system: capitalism. Countries such as Norway, for example, are helped by a large abundance of natural resources and an essentially capitalist system supporting the welfare state.

On the other hand, nations where socialism continues to wreak havoc and spur poverty, disease and crime, like Venezuela, don’t have much support from capitalism. Fact is, “socialism” only works when it’s paid for by capitalism.

* * * * * * * *

In the fall of 1959, Nikita Khrushchev gave a series of speeches here. In one, he said, “We are catching up with you in economic progress, and the time is not far distant when we will move into the lead.” In Russia, that prompted folks to joke: “When we finally catch up to America, can I get off?”

Do you understand the difference between democratic socialism and socialism or do you think they are the same thing?

Democratic Socialism is more insidious and evil. Straight up Socialism can be fought head-on. For every socialist program, a little bit less freedom is to be found, but thats okay with a lot of leftists. They are willing to sacrifice everyone freedom for what amounts to a chimera of security.