Socialismphobia

[Blakk Metal]

Having read both 1984 and Animal Farm I believe Orwell is pretty much a really pesimistic,anti-authoritarian,libertarian,slightly traditionalist,anarchist,so,the thing is Orwell being an advocate of something of a rare form of libertarian socialism might be true but not in a sense most people would understand.

...he's most certainly not a socialist by the marxist definition.

He was a Marxian Socialist, who followed a less violent version of Marxism called Libertarian Socialism. So yeah, he is a socialist by marxist definition.

Libertarian socialism is not a variant of Marxism.

There is a huge misunderstanding here,as when socialism ceases to have a state and a class system but retains it's worker-managed economy it also ceases to be socialist and it starts being communist.

No. There can be socialist societies with states and without.

If it has a state: State socialism.
If it does not: S Libertarian socialism.
If it does not AND removes classes and currencies: Communism.

Corrected.

And in an English sentence, that would read as...?

Sorry let me retype that.

It is extreme, when you put priorities of the community over the individual. That is what socialism/communism/progressivism capitalism does. Put the community rights over the individual rights.

Corrected.

[Liberty of Republic]

Sorry let me retype that.

It is extreme, when you put priorities of the community over the individual. That is what socialism/communism/progressivism does. Put the community rights over the individual rights.

Please do explain how.

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

[Divair]

Please do explain how.

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

You mean Stalinism. And Maoism.

Neither were socialist. Or communist.

[Blakk Metal]

Please do explain how.

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

That only happens in capitalism. If you don't want to produce something, you shouldn't have to.

[Liberty of Republic]

He was a Marxian Socialist, who followed a less violent version of Marxism called Libertarian Socialism. So yeah, he is a socialist by marxist definition.

Libertarian socialism is not a variant of Marxism.

No. There can be socialist societies with states and without.

If it has a state: State socialism.
If it does not: S Libertarian socialism.
If it does not AND removes classes and currencies: Communism.

Corrected.

Sorry let me retype that.

It is extreme, when you put priorities of the community over the individual. That is what socialism/communism/progressivism capitalism does. Put the community rights over the individual rights.

Corrected.

How the hell is that correct? In a free society/market, YOU as the individual make decisions not the collective. Stop being an ass.

[Frisivisia]

Please do explain how.

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

The best good is the good of the group over the individual. The greatest good for the greatest number is the collective interest of society.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Once again, the opposition presents its utter failure to comprehend the Socialist agenda.

In Socialism one would fail or succeed in relation to the amount and quality of their labor (labor includes ideas/intellectual contributions too, not just manual labor). If one doesn't lend labor into society, then you should expect no compensation or assistance from the community and you shall rightly be left to die from your own incompetence and selfishness.

Also subsidization of the economy by the state isn't an integral part of the Socialist mindset, but it is an intelligent policy decision if the business in question is of significant importance to the national economic stability. If the US government hadn't saved General Motors, how many more people to you think would've lost their jobs? The unemployment rate would've been even worse.

Maybe that would of woke up the workers to look else where.

Which means? Are you blaming them or saying "Screw 'em"?

Sometimes things have to die on the vine in order to move on. The progressives keep talking about progress, how do you do that when you artificially prop up businesses as failures?

And yet I can guarantee you that had GM gone under that the Dems would have been shouted at as people who hate business. Please tell me where all the victims of business failures are going to go when the business in which they work fails.

The slippery slope though of collectivism is

A logical fallacy.

that soon you will have society/government and such telling individuals what they can produce or what not to produce rather than having the individual find out naturally by demand.

No, because socialism is about workers' control. Nice try.

One reason why Communist party of Russia in the early 1920s started off as a pure communist/socialist system until they realized that humans will always have parties/camps or ideologies that are different.

At what point were the Bolsheviks "pure socialists"?

Can not compartmentalize society into a socialist system and push down the individual for long.

As the USSR wasn't socialist, you're firing blanks here.

Please do explain how.

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

You think that the USSR and its ilk were socialist?

That's nice. It's wrong, but nice.

[Frisivisia]

Libertarian socialism is not a variant of Marxism.

Corrected.

Corrected.

How the hell is that correct? In a free society/market, YOU as the individual make decisions not the collective. Stop being an ass.

The good of the indivual is less than that of the collective, because the good of more people is the greater good.

[Liberty of Republic]

Seriously people, have any of you got out of your state sponsored schools and actually read history?

What Russia had was communism. Many of you say you are for socialism. THEY both argue for COLLECTIVISM and society(government)control. How hard is it to understand that?

[Divair]

Seriously people, have any of you got out of your state sponsored schools and actually read history?

What Russia had was communism. Many of you say you are for socialism. THEY both argue for COLLECTIVISM and society(government)control. How hard is it to understand that?

No.


Communism is a stateless, classless, currencyless ideology.
Stalinism does not advocate any of those.

[Frisivisia]

Seriously people, have any of you got out of your state sponsored schools and actually read history?

What Russia had was communism. Many of you say you are for socialism. THEY both argue for COLLECTIVISM and society(government)control. How hard is it to understand that?

What Russia had was Stalinsm. Many of us are not for socialism. Collectivism is not evil, it's logical. The greatest good for the greatest number. How hard is that to understand?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Seriously people, have any of you got out of your state sponsored schools and actually read history?

Have you ever stopped to consider that you're being lied to, consistently, by a capitalist country's education system?

What Russia had was communism.

Have a read.
No, it was Communism.

Many of you say you are for socialism. THEY both argue for COLLECTIVISM and society(government)control. How hard is it to understand that?

Because it's wrong? State ownership=/=worker ownership.

[Liberty of Republic]

How the hell is that correct? In a free society/market, YOU as the individual make decisions not the collective. Stop being an ass.

The good of the indivual is less than that of the collective, because the good of more people is the greater good.

Says the drone. Sorry but my individual rights are hell of a lot more important then societies, otherwise you are advocating for slavery. No slavery in a mutual/volunteer society of capitalism. Of course some of you will argue that you get no choice if you have to leave a job.

[Mavorpen]

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

You mean Stalinism. And Maoism.

Neither were socialist. Or communist.

Didn't we already go over this? They are both communist ideologies. Did they succeed in creating a communist society? No. So I'd rather you explain to them that 1) you aren't a Stalinist nor a Maoist and 2) that it doesn't matter, because they do not represent an actual communist society.

[Mavorpen]

Says the drone. Sorry but my individual rights are hell of a lot more important then societies, otherwise you are advocating for slavery. No slavery in a mutual/volunteer society of capitalism. Of course some of you will argue that you get no choice if you have to leave a job.

Your individual rights stop where the loss of the rights of others begins. The founding fathers understood this, why do you not? The notion that somehow what happens to the society is of no importance to the individual is exactly why we need government in the first place.

[Frisivisia]

You mean Stalinism. And Maoism.

Neither were socialist. Or communist.

Didn't we already go over this? They are both communist ideologies. Did they succeed in creating a communist society? No. So I'd rather you explain to them that 1) you aren't a Stalinist nor a Maoist and 2) that it doesn't matter, because they do not represent an actual communist society.

Stalinism is a socialist system, not a communist system. It advocates for money. It advocates for a state. It advocates of classes. It's barely socialist.

[Liberty of Republic]

Seriously people, have any of you got out of your state sponsored schools and actually read history?

Have you ever stopped to consider that you're being lied to, consistently, by a capitalist country's education system?

What Russia had was communism.

Have a read.
No, it was Communism.

Many of you say you are for socialism. THEY both argue for COLLECTIVISM and society(government)control. How hard is it to understand that?

Because it's wrong? State ownership=/=worker ownership.

Lied to? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Okay buddy.
First of all, I am more of a free thinker then all of the religious individuals and collectivists on this board, trust me on that one. But you so called socialists are thinking you are atheists too I bet. Person that truly is free willed will not fall for the crap that these "socialists" spout. If you are for truly free society, then you want a society that ALLOWS the individual to have more rights, otherwise you are a drone.

[Blakk Metal]

Libertarian socialism is not a variant of Marxism.

Corrected.

Corrected.

How the hell is that correct? In a free society/market, YOU as the individual make decisions not the collective.

Bullshit

Stop being an ass.

I think that's flaming.

For example, telling a individual owner what to produce by the community/government/society(thus majority mob rule) and when he refuses to follow, they punish him when he tries to sell. Happened all the time in not just Russia but other nations that followed collectivism. Group over individual.

The best good is the good of the group over the individual. The greatest good for the greatest number is the collective interest of society.

My actual rights trump society's imaginary 'rights'.

How the hell is that correct? In a free society/market, YOU as the individual make decisions not the collective. Stop being an ass.

The good of the indivual is less than that of the collective, because the good of more people is the greater good.

Only a person can have rights. The idea of a concept having rights is utterly absurd.

Seriously people, have any of you got out of your state sponsored schools and actually read history?

What Russia had was communism. Many of you say you are for socialism. THEY both argue for COLLECTIVISM and society(government)control. How hard is it to understand that?

What Russia had was Stalinsm. Many of us are not for socialism. Collectivism is not evil, it's illogical. The greatest good for the greatest number a concept. How hard is that to understand?

Corrected.

Because it's wrong? State ownership=/=worker ownership.

Didn't you hear? The state always represents its people and always cares about what they think.

Didn't we already go over this? They are both communist ideologies. Did they succeed in creating a communist society? No. So I'd rather you explain to them that 1) you aren't a Stalinist nor a Maoist and 2) that it doesn't matter, because they do not represent an actual communist society.

Stalinism is a socialist system, not a communist system. It advocates for money. It advocates for a state. It advocates of classes. It's barely socialist.

State =/= worker.
State =/= citizens.

[Frisivisia]

The good of the indivual is less than that of the collective, because the good of more people is the greater good.

Says the drone. Sorry but my individual rights are hell of a lot more important then societies, otherwise you are advocating for slavery. No slavery in a mutual/volunteer society of capitalism. Of course some of you will argue that you get no choice if you have to leave a job.

The greatest good for the greatest number of people is what society should strive for. Individuals should have rights, and many of them, but individual rights are not God.

[Mavorpen]

Stalinism is a socialist system, not a communist system. It advocates for money. It advocates for a state. It advocates of classes. It's barely socialist.

I didn't say it was a communist system or society, I said it was a communist ideology. There is a difference.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Have you ever stopped to consider that you're being lied to, consistently, by a capitalist country's education system?



Have a read.
No, it was Communism.



Because it's wrong? State ownership=/=worker ownership.

Lied to? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Okay buddy.
First of all, I am more of a free thinker then all of the religious individuals and collectivists on this board, trust me on that one.

That's demonstrably false, but let's continue.

But you so called socialists are thinking you are atheists too I bet. Person that truly is free willed will not fall for the crap that these "socialists" spout. If you are for truly free society, then you want a society that ALLOWS the individual to have more rights, otherwise you are a drone.

Proving that you failed to read or address anything I posted, or read the OP of the thread I linked, or read the logical rebuttals of your point of any of the 4 people currently engaged in tearing your nonsense arguments to shreds.

Congratulations on your rebuttal.

[Liberty of Republic]

Says the drone. Sorry but my individual rights are hell of a lot more important then societies, otherwise you are advocating for slavery. No slavery in a mutual/volunteer society of capitalism. Of course some of you will argue that you get no choice if you have to leave a job.

Your individual rights stop where the loss of the rights of others begins. The founding fathers understood this, why do you not? The notion that somehow what happens to the society is of no importance to the individual is exactly why we need government in the first place.

Oh my gosh.
What the founding fathers wanted was a LIMITED society controls and government so the INDIVIDUAL has the maximum of freedoms, not the other way around. And yes when your rights interfere with other individual rights is wrong, but what collectivism advocates is that society should be the one that decides what individuals get for rights.

[Frisivisia]

Have you ever stopped to consider that you're being lied to, consistently, by a capitalist country's education system?



Have a read.
No, it was Communism.



Because it's wrong? State ownership=/=worker ownership.

Lied to? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Okay buddy.
First of all, I am more of a free thinker then all of the religious individuals and collectivists on this board, trust me on that one. But you so called socialists are thinking you are atheists too I bet. Person that truly is free willed will not fall for the crap that these "socialists" spout. If you are for truly free society, then you want a society that ALLOWS the individual to have more rights, otherwise you are a drone.

You are a free thinker, that's why you read Atlas and immediately agreed with everything Ayn Rand said.

[Frisivisia]

Your individual rights stop where the loss of the rights of others begins. The founding fathers understood this, why do you not? The notion that somehow what happens to the society is of no importance to the individual is exactly why we need government in the first place.

Oh my gosh.
What the founding fathers wanted was a LIMITED society controls and government so the INDIVIDUAL has the maximum of freedoms, not the other way around. And yes when your rights interfere with other individual rights is wrong, but what collectivism advocates is that society should be the one that decides what individuals get for rights.

Bullshit. Collectivism states that what is best for the most people is what should be done.

[Mavorpen]

If you are for truly free society, then you want a society that ALLOWS the individual to have more rights, otherwise you are a drone.

Which socialism does. It allows you to own the means of production, instead of having it concentrated in the hands of a select few. These select few are actually PROTECTED by the government. Your system is nothing more than thieves who hoard the capital and wealth which allows them to limit your freedoms. All the while, you're screaming, "DOWN WITH THE GUBMENT!" when your own capitalist system encourages a large state in the first place.