The Soviet Union was AGAINST Socialism

Haha, it is true that they don't want ZERO regulation, they want close ZERO regulation, but they want the minimal state, and it is dangerous. They want to privatize almost every sector except security, corporations need the protection from the state when the riots start.

Didn't you learn from the previous period of the crash of the 29, and the laissez-faire of that capitalism?

Chomsky isn't reinventing socialism, the theory that he defends is contemporaneous to the Marxism. You should study a bit of history and you would discover that in the First International, where was born the socialism, there were two confronted ideologies, Marx with his authoritarian socialism and Bakunin with his libertarian socialism. They finished as enemies, and the libertarianism always reported the authoritarian socialism and how it would finnish how ended and finally it would become capitalism. Exactly what passed to the URSS.

 

Of course you once again move from your original false rhetoric to a more moderate one; but alas, it is lacking in factual content.

They (Conservatives), whoever that may be in your mind, want us to stick to the Constitutional foundation of our nation where the Federal Government is ONLY to administer our laws and defend the nation. Creating a nanny welfare state designed by partisan politicians to pander to an ignorant electorate who think they can get something for nothing was not the intent.

Socialism cannot succeed under any stretch of the imagination and its failures are littered throughout history. Any system that requires central decision makers and “deciders” in lieu of market forces that can better react and provide people with the goods and services they demand will fail.

Read the Constitution; become informed.

REALLY; you are perhaps the first one on this forum that has blamed, incorrectly, the crash on laissez-faire capitalism. Please share where you got this information and provide substantive credible support for this theory; I would love to see it.

Did I claim he is re-inventing? I thought I claimed he was attempting to re-write the historic record of failure. Socialism and Marxism of cousins of the same failed ideology; both prescribe to the failed notion that central authority knows best what is good for people than the people do.

Perhaps you are the one lacking in history as you ignore the failures of BOTH ideological positions for the same reasons.

Nothing more than the typical intellectual drivel ignoring the sociological pathology of man.

You see, the failure of such intellectual masturbation from thinkers with way too much time on their hands but not so much that they do some real investigation into how man thinks is that it requires this idealistic notion that man will behave as the idealists prescribe and that man will forego his tendency to dominate others and work to his own selfish benefit.

I am just here to point out the realities and history of such failed idiot intellectual exercises and why the Constitution was such a brilliant document and has turned American into the most successful, prosperous powerful and benevolent nation the earth has known. Those who denigrate it wallow in ignorance and petty jealousy.

 

Care to state such sources? Second 100 million deaths? I'd like to see the sources the book got from that.

 

Isn't 100 million enough? Do they get a mulligan for that?

 

Remember that capitalism gets the First, Second, Third and Fourth prize when it comes to killing people. Don't underrate your system, kiddiewinkies!

 

Your are funny, Iolo!

Capitalism does not kill people. People who forcibly substitute socialism for capitalism kill people!

We have some good friends who are from the Ukraine. They are very well-educated and came here from Russia. Her mother and aunt were both members of the Communist Party in Russia.

Both of our friends hate communism. Their relatives lived in the Ukraine during the reign of Joseph Stalin. Joseph Stalin had millions of innocent people in the Ukraine put to death because they opposed his economic policies of communism.

The Communists also slaughtered millions of people in Laos and Cambodia for the very same reasons. Do you remember the award winning book, "The Killing Fields”?

Communism, as practiced today, is a very repressive form of economic fascism and must be resisted and defeated at each and every encounter!



Excessively sweet union contracts, open borders, Income Redistribution and free broadband service courtesy of the liberal Democrats! ... Socialism is theft! Pure and Simple!

 

The USSR was, of course, a capitalist state, but monopoly capitalist imperialism in Africa alone killed immensely more people than it ever got around to. It must be lovely to live in a world where the butchers have wings and halos - but keep your eyes on their flaming swords and cleavers, kiddo, do.

 

Yeah, for that there aren't murdering of human rights defenders and workers in Colombia, Honduras,... Pinochet that arrived to the power in Chile thanks to the help of USA and a dictator created by the capitalist interests. All them are innocent. Yeah.

No, capitalism don't kill. No. The difference with authoritarian communist states, is that in the capitalist system, the deaths are done by the corporations, so the government is free of deaths. Because they are more intelligent and make that third parties kill for them.

 

"Socialists cry "Power to the people", and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean — power over people, power to the State."

-- Margaret Thatcher

Socialism is great if you are willing to accept a much reduced standard of living and an oppressive central government who is always telling you what to do and how to live your life to the benefit of the state!

Cuba, North Korea and the old Soviet Union are three perfect examples!

Here is what the Democratic-controlled cities like Chicago. New Jersey and Detroit will look like after all the corporations, small businesses and wealthy tax payers move to cities and townships with more business-friendly workers and much lower tax rates!



"Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans.

In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity."

This is what the liberal Democrats often do when they foolishly tax and spend and drive the middle class out of the central business districts of the urban cities.. America's Beautiful, Horrible Decline courtesy of the foolish, tax and spend and very misguided liberal Democrats!

http://www.time.com/time/photogaller...850982,00.html

Lee Plaza Hotel
Once one of the most luxurious residential hotels in Detroit, Lee Plaza closed in the 1990s.

 

A democratically elected central controlling mechanism to ensure a standard that distributes resources more equitably, is not a vice, but a virtue. It is when the mechanism devolves into a republic, then into an oligarchy, that socialism and democracy both fail. The US constitution does not exist anymore. If you do not believe that, then go stand in front of the Jefferson Memorial and express yourself as supposedly guaranteed by the 1st amendment. You will be arrested. Try to carry a gun, you will be arrested. Refuse to open your door of your home, and it gets bashed down by paramilitary thugs, YOU will be arrested for refusal to comply. Get stopped while riding your bike to carry your children to school, YOU will be arrested if you question why. NO, this is not anything more now, that a totalitarian police state run by Corporate oligarchy.

Here is the simple truth: the normal tendency of a group is to be a democratically decided society, and the natural organizing principle is cooperation, NOT averice, greed and conspiracy to control resources and cause deprivation. The greed/self eccentricity is the anomally which causes destruction., which is what democratic socialism in theory tries to prevent.

 

Clearly you've never been to the US.

Who Adam Smith - the founder of modern economics?

How have he or I reinvented it? Actually his descriptors came from Marx and early revolutionaries. Explain how quoting them is a reinvention of socialism? Just because reality contradicts the propaganda you have been brought up to believe doesn't mean you should forsake reality, rather embrace it.

Explain how socialism is failed? Sorry, I disagree. Saying socialism has failed is like saying peace has failed. Since peace has not existed in any lengthy manner does that mean we should forsake peace? According to you, it does.

It has worked out quite often, at least on a small scale.

LOL Actually the reason the US constitution worked and socialism hasn't is because the former had employed the use of the state as an end in itself with forced objectives. Socialism has often arisen in the most volatile of places, unlike the US constitution. Like the French Revolution's pasing of law such as the Declarations of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789) which was basically the same as the Bill of Rights in the US, it failed because of its volatile setting. History is not black and white, although they may teach you that in the US.

 

Who would that be? State-capitalists or state-socialists? They both incurred such fatalities - in fact one continues today.

 

Capitalism has never existed. State-capitalism has and yes it does, extensively.

And people who forcibly substitute anything for anything kill people!

Ok, and this means....what?

um, again what about the millions incurred by the US army in the same places?

Where?

I disagree. It must be diffused by rational and truthful debate, not force and ignorance as you propose.

So you are an anarcho-capitalist?

 

You are funny, MegadethFan.

No one in this forum with an adequate knowledge of recent history agrees with you!

 

I agree,,,Cessna still hasn't answered my question regarding Laos.

 

Are you familiar with:

- Coup d'etat by Suharto in Indonesia
- Coup d'etat by Humberto in Brasil
- Coup d'etat by Pinochet in Chile
- Murderings of thousands of human rights defenders and syndicalists in Colombia
- Coup d'etat in Honduras and murderings of syndicalists and human right defenders

All this with intervention of the CIA, without the CIA they wouldn't have been able to do all this.

All this are coup d'etat to serve the capitalism. All them introduced the neoliberal ideas, that now are tried to be introduced democratically, and that took to the ruin all that countries, while in the previous systems they were progressing.

It is the capitalism. And I've not mentioned all the killings done in the name of capitalism, it is just a very short list.

 

,,but in some cases,,horrific.

 

Watch and study the 1984 British drama film "The Killing Fields" and it will answer all your questions.

Here is a good start.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Z1sj7gzpCk"]YouTube - ‪The Killing Fields Trailer‬‏[/ame]

 

You really need to brush up on your history and geography!

Laos is not Cambodia

 

Do you know that the dictatorship of Pol Pot was done by the support of USA. And one of the first things that he did was kill all communists, you do know that, no?

And he mentioned Laos not Cambodia, but well, you failed again

 

This is true. In 1979 (if I remember rightly) Vietnam sent the troops into the Parrot Beak region of Cambodia when the Khmer Rouge started forcibly evacuating, burning out villages and generally doing nasty things to the ethnic Vietnamese in that region. America armed the Khmer Rouge as a bit of a payback for the bloody nose they got in Vietnam.

Also, after the Khmer Rouge fled to the Thai border, America supported the Khmer Rouge with aid.


U.S. support of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge is thoroughly documented in an article in CAQ magazine (formerly Covert Action Quarterly) by Australian journalist John Pilger, "The Long Secret Alliance: Uncle Sam and Pol Pot."* Some quotations from that article:

"The US not only helped to create conditions that brought Cambodia's Khmer Rouge to power in 1975, but actively supported the genocidal force, politically and financially. By January 1980, the US was secretly funding Pol Pot's exiled forces on the Thai border. The extent of this support -- $85 million from 1980-86 -- was revealed 6 years later in correspondence between congressional lawyer Jonathan Winer, then counsel to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation."



http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/pol/polpotmontclarion0498.html

 

"The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"

Hrmmm... I guess the OP is right! They opposed socialism..!

Oh... wait...

 

Your point here is what? You have repeated yourself three times now - each time not proving anything!