Why Are Americans and Conservatives So Afraid of Socialism?

[Rigby5]

/----/ Is Finland providing military protection for other free nations like the USA is? Is Finland being overrun by hoards of illegals streaming over the border signing up for welfare? Does Finland have rampant crime in big cities to contend with? This looks like a survey crafted to make socialist countries look good and the USA look bad. So when are you moving to Finland? Never, I bet.
View attachment 578920

The US does not at all protect ANYONE at all.
The US is the single most offensive, aggressive, and harmful nation militarily, in the world.
We were not "protecting" Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Palestine, or anywhere actually.
The US has murdered more innocent people than the whole rest of the world combined.

As for US cities, poverty and injustice comes from the wealthy elite who charge high rents, prevent unions, and have oppressive laws like the War on Drugs.
The fact the majority then tries to elect progressives to help them is natural, but it was not the progressives who caused the problems at all.

 

[jc456]

The US does not at all protect ANYONE at all.
The US is the single most offensive, aggressive, and harmful nation militarily, in the world.
We were not "protecting" Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Palestine, or anywhere actually.
The US has murdered more innocent people than the whole rest of the world combined.

As for US cities, poverty and injustice comes from the wealthy elite who charge high rents, prevent unions, and have oppressive laws like the War on Drugs.
The fact the majority then tries to elect progressives to help them is natural, but it was not the progressives who caused the problems at all.

so we should have allowed Germany to take over the world? is that your suggesting.

 

[Rigby5]

All extremely homogenous societies. Diversity sounds neat and all, but you need like minded and people with similar goals to make it work.

All human beings start with similar goals and values because they come from our DNA.
But the problem is too many Gordon Gekkos, who think "greed is good".
Those greedy people are not natural and can become real problems if they gain too much power, even though they are a small minority.

 

[jc456]

The US does not at all protect ANYONE at all.
The US is the single most offensive, aggressive, and harmful nation militarily, in the world.
We were not "protecting" Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Palestine, or anywhere actually.
The US has murdered more innocent people than the whole rest of the world combined.

As for US cities, poverty and injustice comes from the wealthy elite who charge high rents, prevent unions, and have oppressive laws like the War on Drugs.
The fact the majority then tries to elect progressives to help them is natural, but it was not the progressives who caused the problems at all.

oh, and every city that has ghetto's is a demofk city. every one. So please spare us your bullshit for a day.

 

[bripat9643]

American ignorance of the rest of the world strikes again.
Anyone surprised?

You appear to be the one ignorant of the rest of the world.

 

[jc456]

All extremely homogenous societies. Diversity sounds neat and all, but you need like minded and people with similar goals to make it work.

it doesn't work because that doesn't exist. The pilgrims learned that. Look up history. That was their path they came here with and found out early that lazy fks are lazy fks and mooch off others who do the laboring. Without laborers, you have death and sickness. it's really quite amazing the amount of lazy that is a demofk who thinks that is at all possible. Pilgrims were desperate people and learned the lazy came with them.

 

[jc456]

American ignorance of the rest of the world strikes again.
Anyone surprised?

dude, hilarious. you speak for others using your own mind and not theirs. please stop, you're a fking fool.

 

[bripat9643]

Nope. Brown people don’t make an unhappy country. Own your point in another thread instead of being sly about it in this one. Plenty of homogenous places are unhappy. Point refuted.

Mixing two cultures together is what makes a country unhappy. Just look at the former Yugoslavia. Rwanda, India, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Nigeria, Indonesia and Sudan.

 

[struth]

Conservatives are willfully ignorant as to what socialism actually is.

socialist keep saying that as people die and live in poverty

Conservatives aren’t scared of it, in that they know it will always fail, it’s just the destruction it causes on its way to people lives, and well being that makes them nervous

 

[jc456]

Conservatives are willfully ignorant as to what socialism actually is.

oh the irony there.

 

[Rigby5]

/——-/ It was passed by both the House and Senate. Geeeze, and you call me an idiot.

Both the house and the senate are totally corrupt.
It would not be hard to make IRA regulations fair, but they are not, intentionally.

 

[jc456]

Both the house and the senate are totally corrupt.
It would not be hard to make IRA regulations fair, but they are not, intentionally.

yep, exactly what trump said.

 

[BackAgain]

Conservatives are willfully ignorant as to what socialism actually is.

Adam_Clayton_Joke: when you absolutely positively need stupid assholery.

He’s here for you.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And if not willfully ignorant, conservatives are willfully dishonest about what socialism actually is.

Conservatives are liars and demagogues, they lie about ‘socialism’ and who is a ‘socialist’ in an effort to promote fear and baselessly attack political opponents.

 

[bripat9643]

And if not willfully ignorant, conservatives are willfully dishonest about what socialism actually is.

Conservatives are liars and demagogues, they lie about ‘socialism’ and who is a ‘socialist’ in an effort to promote fear and baselessly attack political opponents.

Switch "conservative" with "prog" and your post is accurate.

 

[Rigby5]

so we should have allowed Germany to take over the world? is that your suggesting.

If the US had not joined WWI on the wrong side, that was corrupt, deliberately assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, then invaded Germany and Austria, and illegally starved Germany into surrendering, then WWII would never have happened.

But Germany was not about to "take over the world" in WWII.
The Russians beat them all by themselves, and we did not really do much until it was already a done deal.
Over 90% of the troops, fighting, and new weapons were all on the eastern front.
The reason Germany did so well in WWII was simply because all the so called Allied countries were so corrupt and evil that most of its populations were ambivalent.
For example, the Russians were not motivated to fight for Stalin.
It was not until there were atrocities by Germans, that they Russians started really fighting back.
The same was true in all the allied countries to varying degrees.
The governments before WWII were totally corrupt and evil.
The US being no exception.
There is no question the US entering WWI on the allied side was totally evil.

 

[Rigby5]

socialist keep saying that as people die and live in poverty

Conservatives aren’t scared of it, in that they know it will always fail, it’s just the destruction it causes on its way to people lives, and well being that makes them nervous

Except that you can't name a single socialist country, much less one that is also poor.
Socialism means communal and cooperative pooling of tax money for the equitable common good.
There is no way to do that without a democratic republic, so if a country has an authoritarian central government, it can't be socialist.

 

[Rigby5]

oh the irony there.

Who do you think ensured the Bolshevik revolution would be taken over by criminals like Stalin and Lenin?
It was the capitalist countries of the west.
It was they who sent Lenin into Russia by a special train, and provided the funds and weapons for Lenin and Stalin to take over and kill off all the real communists, socialist, and anarchist.

The irony is that the USSR was about the LEAST communist country in the entire world.

 

[struth]

Except that you can't name a single socialist country, much less one that is also poor.
Socialism means communal and cooperative pooling of tax money for the equitable common good.
There is no way to do that without a democratic republic, so if a country has an authoritarian central government, it can't be socialist.

no that’s not what socialism means…not according to Marx

Venezuela, USSR, NK, Cuba….some socialist countries for you

 

[Rigby5]

Switch "conservative" with "prog" and your post is accurate.

We should start coming up with new labels.
The actual meaning of "conservative" is good because it means retaining the Bill of Rights and Constitutional protections, as well as not borrowing financially.
The actual meaning of "progressive" is good because it means fixing historic evils like slavery, union busting, monopolies, abusive courts, etc.
The actual meaning of "liberal" is good because it means preventing violations of basic human rights.

The current dems and republicans are not good and are doing everything wrong.
Like Bush and Trump added trillions to the deficit, so were not conservative.
Clinton and Obama were involved in the illegal domestic War on Drugs as well as illegal foreign wars of aggression, so were not liberal or progressive.