Um wtf are you saying?
Advertisement

by New Socialist South Africa » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:58 pm
Olthar wrote:Anyone who buys "x-ray specs" expecting them to be real deserves to lose their money.

by Graditora » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:58 pm
Luziyca wrote:You were the one responsible for the Second Amendment.
Bafuria wrote:If I was allowed to carry I would carry a pistol with big, loud muzzle blast, something that says "I JUST SHOT YOU D:<".
Ea90 wrote:Someone knows what they want.
Romberg wrote:You do not mess with the nation with a scorpion on its flag.

by New Laikland » Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:59 pm
Kronstad wrote:1. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism "c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably"
2. I never endorsed North Korea's leader; further, I have posted earlier that I disagree with communism in practice, after the USSR and China. Of course, reading is difficult...
3. I see above that you (still) don't understand the difference between "sharing" and "stealing"

by New Socialist South Africa » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:00 pm
Olthar wrote:Anyone who buys "x-ray specs" expecting them to be real deserves to lose their money.

by Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:00 pm


by New Laikland » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:01 pm
Tengria wrote:Regardless, "socialist" isn't a very specific ideology. HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST, ARE YOU HITLER?

by The Scientific States » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:01 pm

by European Socialist Republic » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:01 pm

by The Scientific States » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:02 pm

by New Socialist South Africa » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:02 pm
Olthar wrote:Anyone who buys "x-ray specs" expecting them to be real deserves to lose their money.

by Unitaristic Regions » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:02 pm

by Wolfmanne » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:03 pm
Luveria wrote:Unitaristic Regions wrote:
No, that's because Americans can be idiots. Don't blame rabid patriotism and disinformation on communism.
I'm not. If someone says some of the best reforms capitalism experienced were as a response to communism's existence, I can say that about the worst setbacks that happened from a fear of communism (due to its existence) which led to a kneejerk reaction against anything remotely beneficial to the poor.

by Senatus Populusque Lundensis » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:04 pm
New Socialist South Africa wrote:Senatus Populusque Lundensis wrote:Definition varies depending on who you ask, but I strongly disagree with you. Social democracy is, by any logical definition, socialism through democracy.
socialism ≠ capitalism
Thus, you are wrong.
No sorry you are wrong. Socialism requires the workers to control the means of production, Democratic Socialism seeks to create a strong welfare, education and / or healthcare state with high amounts of state intervention and usually quite high taxes (particularly for the rich and for big businesses), but the bourgeoisie still control the means of production (they just have to be much cleverer, luckier, wealthier or more ruthless to survive and prosper). As the bourgeoisie and not the workers control the means of production under Democratic Socialism, it is actually just a leftist form of Capitalism.
Duvniask wrote:Senatus Populusque Lundensis wrote:
I know Wikipedia isn't the best of sources, but... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy
Still socialism.
No, it doesn't exactly advocate social ownership.Social democracy is a political ideology that officially has as its goal the establishment of democratic socialism through reformist and gradualist methods.[1] Alternatively, social democracy is defined as a policy regime involving a universal welfare state and collective bargaining schemes within the framework of a capitalist economy. It is often used in this manner to refer to the social models and economic policies prominent in Western and Northern Europe during the later half of the 20th century.[2][3]
This is what social democracy has evolved to.
Social democracy is a political ideology that officially has as its goal the establishment of democratic socialism through reformist and gradualist methods. Alternatively, social democracy is defined as a policy regime involving a universal welfare state and collective bargaining schemes within the framework of a capitalist economy. It is often used in this manner to refer to the social models and economic policies prominent in Western and Northern Europe during the later half of the 20th century.

by Clone Creatures » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:04 pm

by Esternial » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:04 pm

by New Laikland » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:04 pm
Wolfmanne wrote:Luveria has a point. The NHS is not considered anywhere near socialistic in the UK. Heck, I'd say a key component of one nation conservatism (a form of conservatism in the UK) is strong support for universal health care. Even our thatcherite cousins support the NHS. Bismarck, a key influence on modern conservatism, supported a strong welfare state and universal health as a bastion against leftism (including both socialism and marxism).

by Tengria » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:05 pm
Unitaristic Regions wrote:Tengria wrote:Who knows, sometimes this game does some weird things.
Regardless, "socialist" isn't a very specific ideology. HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST, ARE YOU HITLER?
Hitler wasn't a socialist, actually. He was what I like to call a welfare capitalist.
Socialism is only socialism when there's at least public ownership of the means of production. That doesn't imply classlessness or some kind of obsession with the people as "ants".

by New Socialist South Africa » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:05 pm
Olthar wrote:Anyone who buys "x-ray specs" expecting them to be real deserves to lose their money.

by Aeken » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:05 pm
Tengria wrote:Unitaristic Regions wrote:
Hitler wasn't a socialist, actually. He was what I like to call a welfare capitalist.
Socialism is only socialism when there's at least public ownership of the means of production. That doesn't imply classlessness or some kind of obsession with the people as "ants".
It's how he called himself, how would I know if you don't use it with the same meaning? That's what I meant.
Also it was a joke, if the ALL CAPS and bold letters didn't tip anyone off.


by New Laikland » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:05 pm
Tengria wrote:It's how he called himself, how would I know if you don't use it with the same meaning? That's what I meant.

by The Scientific States » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:06 pm
Tengria wrote:Unitaristic Regions wrote:
Hitler wasn't a socialist, actually. He was what I like to call a welfare capitalist.
Socialism is only socialism when there's at least public ownership of the means of production. That doesn't imply classlessness or some kind of obsession with the people as "ants".
It's how he called himself, how would I know if you don't use it with the same meaning? That's what I meant.
Also it was a joke, if the ALL CAPS and bold letters didn't tip anyone off.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, Elwher, Fractalnavel, Greater Cesnica, Gun Manufacturers, Valyxias
Advertisement