Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:44 pmCorporatocracy is corporate leadership of government
NationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
Communism as a philosophical disease
Page 16 of 23
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:44 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:45 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:45 pmVazdania wrote:Distruzio wrote:
Yes indeed. But which subset of collectivism characterizes those ideologies?
Horizontal collectivism, which gives rise to both socialism and communism, enjoys a significant presence in the American consciousness - just as much as vertical collectivism (which gives rise to monarchism and bonapartism). Yet it is only vertical collectivism that characterizes American society while horizontal collectivism characterizes the philosophical underpinnings of several institutions Americans have accepted - such as emergency service providers, elections, and so on.
It is this reality that sparked the Founders argument for a Bill of Rights. Rights protecting American individualism against horizontal collectivism. Socialism, is merely the manner in which that collectivism has been administered to American society.
It ain't a bad thing. If anything, American society has flourished under this reality. While those with whom I used to affiliate myself would say that this prosperity comes despite the existence of horizontal collectivism and socialist administrations. I say it doesn't matter. Folks want a more socialized - a more egalitarian society.
Welll I don't.
That's because you, like I, are a dirty little reactionary. We tend to remove ourselves from the franchise which is, as I've pointed out before, a form of soft socialism in America. So we don't affect the franchise results which, inevitably, give rise to a more socialized State - a servile State.
It's what the American population wants.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:45 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:45 pmI don't care who the hell makes my pizza as long as it is cheap and fast...
In the USSR you have to wait all day in a bread line just to get something to eat...
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:45 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:46 pmThe Serbian Empire wrote:Cu Math wrote:[background=][/background]
We have the exact same thing here. Go out west and ask about the mineral rights. You'll find that even if you buy land in Idaho or Montana, you don't own the mineral rights; a corporation does from when the territory was formed. Whole swaths of exclusive control.
That is a mercantilist leftover dating back to the colonial era.
Idaho didnt exist as a territory then.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:46 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:46 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:47 pmDistruzio wrote:Vazdania wrote:Welll I don't.
That's because you, like I, are a dirty little reactionary. We tend to remove ourselves from the franchise which is, as I've pointed out before, a form of soft socialism in America. So we don't affect the franchise results which, inevitably, give rise to a more socialized State - a servile State.
It's what the American population wants.
Q~Q I don't like being dirty though......can I take a bath please?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:47 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:47 pmSilent Majority wrote:Distruzio wrote:
You're mistakenly assuming that I'm sneering the word socialism. I'm not.
And I am quite aware of what you point out. Which is precisely why I chose the term socialism. It not only satisfies the requirements horizontal collectivism but, in its own way, and vertical collectivism. Those examples I use are the most appropriate uses of socialism in the individualized American society. You, and others, merely balk at my use of the term because you presume I sneer it. I don't.
I guess my main point is that it would probably be more accurate to use collectivism in the place of where you're your using socialism. The latter having fairly specific meanings both as a socioeconomic system, and as a political philosophy, of which your examples don't really meet.
And I'm not trying to be condescending, it's just this thread is already filled to the brim with the incorrect usage of terminology.
Oh I follow. Bare in mind, however, that I keep using this term after having already pointed out that the usage of the term "communism" was based in fearmongering. I rather believe socialism gets a bad rap. I may not agree with it. But it ain't... uh... unAmerican.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:48 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:48 pmDistruzio wrote:Pandeeria wrote:Cool, all ideologies have collectivist traits.
Yes indeed. But which subset of collectivism characterizes those ideologies?
Horizontal collectivism, which gives rise to both socialism and communism, enjoys a significant presence in the American consciousness - just as much as vertical collectivism (which gives rise to monarchism and bonapartism). Yet it is only vertical collectivism that characterizes American society while horizontal collectivism characterizes the philosophical underpinnings of several institutions Americans have accepted - such as emergency service providers, elections, and so on.
It is this reality that sparked the Founders argument for a Bill of Rights. Rights protecting American individualism against horizontal collectivism. Socialism, is merely the manner in which that collectivism has been administered to American society.
It ain't a bad thing. If anything, American society has flourished under this reality. While those with whom I used to affiliate myself would say that this prosperity comes despite the existence of horizontal collectivism and socialist administrations. I say it doesn't matter. Folks want a more socialized - a more egalitarian society.
You're saying that Socialism and Communism has taken America as the main mindset?
What drugs are you on?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:48 pmPandeeria wrote:Distruzio wrote:
Yes indeed. But which subset of collectivism characterizes those ideologies?
Horizontal collectivism, which gives rise to both socialism and communism, enjoys a significant presence in the American consciousness - just as much as vertical collectivism (which gives rise to monarchism and bonapartism). Yet it is only vertical collectivism that characterizes American society while horizontal collectivism characterizes the philosophical underpinnings of several institutions Americans have accepted - such as emergency service providers, elections, and so on.
It is this reality that sparked the Founders argument for a Bill of Rights. Rights protecting American individualism against horizontal collectivism. Socialism, is merely the manner in which that collectivism has been administered to American society.
It ain't a bad thing. If anything, American society has flourished under this reality. While those with whom I used to affiliate myself would say that this prosperity comes despite the existence of horizontal collectivism and socialist administrations. I say it doesn't matter. Folks want a more socialized - a more egalitarian society.
You're saying that Socialism and Communism has taken America as the main mindset?
What drugs are you on?
How'd you get that from what I said?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:50 pmInsel des Wohlstands wrote:Is communism a terrible ideology? Yes. Is it a philosophical disease? Not at all.
How is it a bad ideology? It should never be implemented because people are assholes, but that doesn't mean it's a bad ideology.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:51 pmIts a bad ideology because it makes everyone equal....ew...
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:51 pmDistruzio wrote:Horizontal collectivism, which gives rise to both socialism and communism, enjoys a significant presence in the American consciousness
No, it isn't in the American Consciousness. America doesn't have any socialist trait besides from a couple democratic businesses.
US simply isn't socialist.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:51 pmIt however did fall into the Spanish explored areas by the late 1700s although no permanent settlements were made in Idaho. Similar policies on mineral rights did exist in most colonial areas and that's a topic for a different thread.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:51 pmFreistaat Sachse wrote:The New Sea Territory wrote:Have you read Das Kapital? How about the Conquest of Bread? Anything by Trotsky or Lenin?
You define all your views of communism off one book. Marxism is not all of communist ideals.
No, but I've read the Communist Manifest, Marx's magnum opus. All the other books that followed were based on it.
So you didn't read his actual seminal work in the field nor the work of Engels, Engels being equally as important to Communism as Marx, and yet claim knowledge of the ideology.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:53 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:54 pmPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:54 pmPandeeria wrote:Distruzio wrote:
Nonsense. Socialism perpetuates. Especially here in the United States. The education system? The emergency response system? Elections? All of it... socialism. Or, more accurately, collectivism.
Hahahahah, no.
Education, Elections, etc. are not socialism. There hardly is any work place democracy, the poor-rich divide is insane.
Socialism isn't here any more.IndustrializationPolice raids and attacks on towns with those sympathies wiped it out.
Socialism came after industrialisation in pretty much every Western nation.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:55 pmIdaho was sold to the mining and timber companies to raise money for the railroads. It was divided as a normal good, bet upon, and traded in shares.
Quintessentially capitalist.
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:55 pmPandeeria wrote:Distruzio wrote:Horizontal collectivism, which gives rise to both socialism and communism, enjoys a significant presence in the American consciousness
No, it isn't in the American Consciousness. America doesn't have any socialist trait besides from a couple democratic businesses.
US simply isn't socialist.
I'm not saying it is socialist. I'm saying that socialism perpetuates throughout the American political and economic system because the American public finds that a more socialized perspective is more gratifying and affords them certain degrees of corporate liberty. It's perversion of the terms collectivism and individualism that confuses so many Americans.
The GOP capitalizes on this. And it's unfortunate.