Democratic Socialist Discussion Thread

[SektorE]

There is no class divisions in capitlistic economy. There are only people who are willing to earn what they want and ones who do not. It's much easier to make money by raising taxes than actually earning it.

Aah, yes. The "poor people are all lazy bums!!!1!11" idea.

Of course it's real easy to get up on the social ladder when you have zero contacts, no money to go to a prestigious school (or even get a proper meal) and are probably not very motivated by all the shit that comes with growing up in a poor environment.

Of course rich people never received help from their moms and dads, or simply inherited their wealth.

Yep, and nope.

By the way, if all the poor people of the world would stop working right now, the entire earth would fall flat on its face. I'd be a little more grateful, if I were you.

Poor people won't stop working because in the end they are going to starve then. There are a lot of millionaires who had nothing when they grew up and still managed to be successful.

I'm not from a rich family either but I'm not going to be jealous of people who are more succesful than I am. I can't change reality that most of the simple jobs just are not worth much - probably will be soon replaced by machines and robots anyways.

[Herrebrugh]

Aah, yes. The "poor people are all lazy bums!!!1!11" idea.

Of course it's real easy to get up on the social ladder when you have zero contacts, no money to go to a prestigious school (or even get a proper meal) and are probably not very motivated by all the shit that comes with growing up in a poor environment.

Of course rich people never received help from their moms and dads, or simply inherited their wealth.

Yep, and nope.

By the way, if all the poor people of the world would stop working right now, the entire earth would fall flat on its face. I'd be a little more grateful, if I were you.

Poor people won't stop working because in the end they are going to starve then. There are a lot of millionaires who had nothing when they grew up and still managed to be successful.

I'm not from a rich family either but I'm not going to be jealous of people who are more succesful than I am. I can't change reality that most of the simple jobs just are not worth much - probably will be soon replaced by machines and robots anyways.

I very much doubt those millionaires make up even nearly the majority.

This isn't about jealousy. This is about workers getting the respect they deserve, and the betterment of society as a whole. And I doubt even more that the labour of workers in countries like China will be replaced by robots in the next one-hundred years.

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Socialists oppress people.

How so? State socialism can, but democratic socialism allows democracy and voting to be elected.

Socialism oppresses people like me.

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

There is no class divisions in capitlistic economy. There are only people who are willing to earn what they want and ones who do not. It's much easier to make money by raising taxes than actually earning it.

Tell that shit to a Nam Vet. But seriously their really is class division in capitalistic societies just look America. Their are people who work so hard to get so little and then there are people who don't do anything and have millions. It's a lot more about mini pulsating the system at times then it is about hard work. Of course this isn't always the case but it does happen more often then people like to thing.

Socialists oppress people.

Are you not even trying? Please if your going to try and justify a view point at least make an effort. It's like me saying "Socialism is good because I think that way".

Socialists have a history of killing people that don't agree with them.

[Kelinfort]

How so? State socialism can, but democratic socialism allows democracy and voting to be elected.

Socialism oppresses people like me.

I think you're thinking of a system similar to state capitalism or state socialism. Democratic socialism is elected and representative of the people.

[Atlanticatia]

This. I don't agree with having a socialist/Marxist-Leninism system, but it's hard to call it evil. It's goal is social justice and protecting peoples rights. Whether you think that it achieves those goals is a different story.
This is In contrast to laissez faire capitalism. Some might call it evil because it does not protect people's positive rights, and ends up with various social classes/oppressed people.

A Marxist-Leninist system is not a socialist system, and it would not be out of line to refer to such a system as evil.

And that, is why I'm a social democrat. I think social democracy combines the merits/goals of both capitalism and socialism (mixed economy/free market + protection of positive rights + fighting for social justice and against oppression)

Social democracy does not strive for a "mixed economy". Classical social democracy believed in a gradualist and reformist approach to socialism, believing it would take a great deal of time for socialism to be realized, so that they should focus on reforming capitalism in the meantime. Modern social democracy supports regulated capitalism without the goal of socialism. Neither support a mix of capitalism and socialism because such an economy cannot exist. The means of production cannot be both privately owned and socially owned at the same time.

By mixed economy, I meant state ownership and provision of free health, free education, and I'd support the public ownership of commodities like oil or mineral wealth. The government could also own power companies, etc. So a decently sized public sector and very strong welfare state.

[Kuzestan]

Tell that shit to a Nam Vet. But seriously their really is class division in capitalistic societies just look America. Their are people who work so hard to get so little and then there are people who don't do anything and have millions. It's a lot more about mini pulsating the system at times then it is about hard work. Of course this isn't always the case but it does happen more often then people like to thing.



Are you not even trying? Please if your going to try and justify a view point at least make an effort. It's like me saying "Socialism is good because I think that way".

Socialists have a history of killing people that don't agree with them.

Does these 'socialists' actually believed in the workers control over the means of production instead of a centralized economy? Apparently not.

The capitalists on the other hand, does have such history.

[Herrebrugh]

Tell that shit to a Nam Vet. But seriously their really is class division in capitalistic societies just look America. Their are people who work so hard to get so little and then there are people who don't do anything and have millions. It's a lot more about mini pulsating the system at times then it is about hard work. Of course this isn't always the case but it does happen more often then people like to thing.



Are you not even trying? Please if your going to try and justify a view point at least make an effort. It's like me saying "Socialism is good because I think that way".

Socialists have a history of killing people that don't agree with them.

That's weird... I don't remember killing anyone that doesn't agree with me... How can that be? I am a socialist, after all...

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Socialists have a history of killing people that don't agree with them.

That's weird... I don't remember killing anyone that doesn't agree with me... How can that be? I am a socialist, after all...

Socialist governments kill dissidents.

[Fallcoast]

That's weird... I don't remember killing anyone that doesn't agree with me... How can that be? I am a socialist, after all...

Socialist governments kill dissidents.

Name one political dissident killed by francoise hollande.

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Socialist governments kill dissidents.

Name one political dissident killed by francoise hollande.

Other socialists do.

[Fallcoast]

Name one political dissident killed by francoise hollande.

Other socialists do.

So basically you're saying that you have no evidence for your assertion so far? Name one socialist. (Not that they don't, but you're not providing evidence)

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Other socialists do.

So basically you're saying that you have no evidence for your assertion so far? Name one socialist. (Not that they don't, but you're not providing evidence)

Joseph Stalin

[Geilinor]

So basically you're saying that you have no evidence for your assertion so far? Name one socialist. (Not that they don't, but you're not providing evidence)

Joseph Stalin

A socialist, but not of the variety this thread is about.

[Kelinfort]

So basically you're saying that you have no evidence for your assertion so far? Name one socialist. (Not that they don't, but you're not providing evidence)

Joseph Stalin

Please remember its is democratic socialism. Meaning the leader is elected democratically.

[Threlizdun]

So basically you're saying that you have no evidence for your assertion so far? Name one socialist. (Not that they don't, but you're not providing evidence)

Joseph Stalin

Did not reign over a socialist governments and thus does not pertain to this thread.

[Russian Socialist Soviet States]

Joseph Stalin

Did not reign over a socialist governments and thus does not pertain to this thread.

How was Soviet Russia not socialist?

[Bojikami]

Democratic Communist here.

[Fallcoast]

Did not reign over a socialist governments and thus does not pertain to this thread.

How was Soviet Russia not socialist?

He is literally the definition of Stalinist communism.

[Threlizdun]

Did not reign over a socialist governments and thus does not pertain to this thread.

How was Soviet Russia not socialist?

Because the means of production were concentrated in the hands of the party elite and were deprived from the workers to use as means of dominating them and exploiting their labor for the accumulation of capital and the furthering of state power. They were an authoritarian state capitalist society. There was nothing socialist about the Soviet Union.

[Republic of Coldwater]

I dislike the idea of Socialism, as it usually leads to high debt levels and a bad economy. By taxing more on businesses that run the economy, and also having heavy taxes on the rich, which deters success, the economy will have less money to be used for investments, for development. If a company wasn't taxed as much as it is in a Socialist country, it would be able to expand.

Furthermore, Socialism has lead to heavy debt levels. The high taxes lead to corporate exodus, which as a result, means less revenue for the government, but the government continues on their funding of gargantuan nationalized welfare and healthcare systems, which leads to large deficits and large debt.

Socialism may have good intentions, but when applied, causes many problems.

[Republic of Coldwater]

How was Soviet Russia not socialist?

Because the means of production were concentrated in the hands of the party elite and were deprived from the workers to use as means of dominating them and exploiting their labor for the accumulation of capital and the furthering of state power. They were an authoritarian state capitalist society. There was nothing socialist about the Soviet Union.

Uhm, nationalized welfare and HealthCare, ban of private enterprise, and the idea of Capitalism is when the state owns nothing and private owners own everything, so the term "state capitalism" makes absolutely no sense.

[Bojikami]

Because the means of production were concentrated in the hands of the party elite and were deprived from the workers to use as means of dominating them and exploiting their labor for the accumulation of capital and the furthering of state power. They were an authoritarian state capitalist society. There was nothing socialist about the Soviet Union.

Uhm, nationalized welfare and HealthCare, ban of private enterprise, and the idea of Capitalism is when the state owns nothing and private owners own everything, so the term "state capitalism" makes absolutely no sense.

Incorrect. State Capitalism makes perfect sense.
From Wikipedia:
"State capitalism is characterized by the dominance of state-owned business enterprises in the economy. Examples of state capitalism include corporatized government agencies (agencies organized along corporate and business management practices) and states that own controlling shares of publicly listed corporations (acting as a shareholder)."

[Fralinia]

Since the definition of democratic socialism is so vague, are we extending this to social democrats as well? I'm a proponent of the Nordic Model, and I was wondering where we drew the line here.

[Yanalia]

Because the means of production were concentrated in the hands of the party elite and were deprived from the workers to use as means of dominating them and exploiting their labor for the accumulation of capital and the furthering of state power. They were an authoritarian state capitalist society. There was nothing socialist about the Soviet Union.

Uhm, nationalized welfare and HealthCare, ban of private enterprise, and the idea of Capitalism is when the state owns nothing and private owners own everything, so the term "state capitalism" makes absolutely no sense.

Actually the definition of capitalism is a system under which labourers sell their labour power to capitalists who own the means of production. The capitalist can just as easily be the state.