The "horrors" of Socialism Explained

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Golem, Mar 8, 2019.

  1. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    11,469
    Likes Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As we all know, Socialism is a political system in which the government forcefully takes away from the rich their possessions. Which are given to the poor, thus making them rich. Which means that the government must take away their possessions, and give them back to those who were formerly the rich, because they are now poor. Making them again rich.... and so on... endlessly.

    The right has made up some similar absurd definition of Socialism. Made to order by Hannity and Limbaugh so they can attack it. Not being Hannity and Limbaugh too bright and even less "educated", all they did was look up with some sort of "idealized" verion of "Communism". Call that "socialism". And attack that. Despite the fact that it has nothing to do with anything that anybody has proposed. But, of course, people like Hannity and Limbaugh would be lost if they had to debate somebody about real proposals. They feel it's much easier to attack absurd statements that they themselves made up.

    The fact is that socialism is much simpler than that. Socialism is the opposite of individualism. Which does not mean that Socialism wants to eliminate individualism. It simply means that it's the contrasting ideology. While the ultimate goal of individualism is individual gain. The goal of socialism, is social welfare, equality of opportunities at all levels within the society, and to secure the benefit of liberty and justice for all of us and our posterity.

    What AOC, Bernie and others are talking about is called "Democratic Socialism" . This is Socialism under a Democracy,. Which means that everything has to be in accordance with our laws and our Constitution as the Democratic Republic that we are.

    It's that simple. We have always had socialism in this country. Our road system is socialist. Our public education system. Medicare, Social Security, our Postal Services....

    Even our Constitution. Of course, Cemocratic Socialism was not ideologically established at the time. The reason is simple: our Constitution, our Independence, and our Revolution actually helped shape Democratic Socialism. We defined what Democracy is today, and we defined what Socialism is today.

    In a Democratic nation, the Government provides for the Common Defense. There are no individual mercenaries. The Government promotes the General Welfare. That;s everybody's welfare. Of the whole of society. And, of course, the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. Not just for those who can afford them. This ensures Justice and domestic Tranquility.

    This is the basis in which this country was constituted. And they are what today are considered "Socialist Principles"

    Of course, private property is explicitly protected in the Constitution. As are individual rights. These are integral parts of a Democratic Republic.

    I tend more towards Democratic Socialism than to individualism, but circumstances always rule. I am not an ideologue! Nor is, obviously, the Constitution. It contains a healthy does of Socialism. It is not socialist. A healthy does of socialism, along with a healthy dose of libertarianim, conservativism, individualism and every non-destructive ideology is always desirable.

    It's not the ideology that is the problem. It's ideologues. Those who think that one ideology solves all the problems. They don't! None do. Solutions are found in all ideologies depending on the circumstances.

    So, to the right, the real "horror" of socialism is that, if people realize that we have already been living in a heavily socialist society since.... we became a nation... they might have to find a new talking point.
     
  2. TheGreatSatan

    TheGreatSatan Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    17,476
    Likes Received:
    13,887
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I like that Democrats are finally admitting they are socialist. About time.
     
    Draco, US Conservative, Texan and 8 others like this.
  3. PrincipleInvestment

    PrincipleInvestment Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    Messages:
    21,288
    Likes Received:
    14,876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The (D)'s are having a real identity crisis. Pelosi never dreamt she'd be holding the gavel, but being led around by the nose. Karma is awesome.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
    Jestsayin and BaghdadBob like this.
  4. BaghdadBob

    BaghdadBob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2016
    Messages:
    1,341
    Likes Received:
    1,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL! The donks can't even condemn antisemitism.
     
    chingler and Darthcervantes like this.
  5. Esperance

    Esperance Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    Messages:
    2,540
    Likes Received:
    1,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They are actually admitting to much more than just being Socialist... Shades of something that looks like full blown Fascism...

    Wow Democrats.jpg
     
  6. opion8d

    opion8d Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Messages:
    3,778
    Likes Received:
    2,691
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nicely done/written. Good description of reality.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
    Aleksander Ulyanov likes this.
  7. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    38,488
    Likes Received:
    5,622
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When are Republicans going to start admitting the same ?
     
    BobbyJoe and Golem like this.
  8. Jestsayin

    Jestsayin Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    8,654
    Likes Received:
    6,733
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All this is moot because the US was founded as a Republic. To those who prefer socialism, planes leave for South Korea and it's just a short hop over the barbed wire into socialist No. Korea. Other than that Venezuela is another choice but bring a flashlight as the power is currently is off in many large cities.
     
    Starjet likes this.
  9. Esperance

    Esperance Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    Messages:
    2,540
    Likes Received:
    1,956
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it isn't...

    Reality is based on who controls what... And according to the structure by which decisions are made and as to which course of action is to be taken.

    The closest we have ever been in this country to true Socialism was in the form of Antebellum slavery. Socialism does not promote individual responsibility or independence.
    The first government healthcare program was set up as a blanket policy for slaves working on coastal fortifications in 1808.

    Progressivism is nothing more than a revisit to that system of control and dependency... AKA: Chattel Slavery.
    Progressives simply advocate for the elite to make choices for who they view to be their intellectual inferiors.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  10. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    11,469
    Likes Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So are Republicans.
     
    Gorgeous George and Derideo_Te like this.
  11. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    11,469
    Likes Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Huh?

    That's like saying "All this is moot because the New England Patriots won the Superbowl.

    South Korea??? South Korea is also a Republic. As is North Korea.

    Difference is that the U.S. and South Korea are Democratic Republics while North Korea is a Dictatorial Republic.

    Man! You're so confused it's hilarious!
     
    OldGuy?wise, Derideo_Te and Pants like this.
  12. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    5,416
    Likes Received:
    560
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Like many on this board, I follow the political landscape more closely than most. At no point have I ever seen anyone describe Socialism in a manner even remotely resembling this description
    Nope. Just you. You are the only person that I have ever seen give such an "absurd" definition of Socialism.

    I find it humorous how you wholly mischaracterize how the right decscribes Socialism, and then you follow that by arguing against your ridiculous mischaracterization. I think that is what they call a strawman argument.


    LOL....The irony is dripping off this statement. You are projecting, and basically having an argument with your bathroom mirror.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
    ocean515 likes this.
  13. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    11,469
    Likes Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't say you (or anybody, for that matter) had. But some have come close. They view "socialism" as "taking away" or even "theft". Which is not true, and similar to what I described above.

    I'm amused that you couldn't discern the serious part from the irony.

    Unfortunately you didn't comment on the main topic.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  14. Sirius Black

    Sirius Black Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,300
    Likes Received:
    1,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here are some examples of "socialism" that exist in the United States today. Each one is paid for by all (taxes), but not used by all.

    Social Security
    Medicare
    Medicaid
    Affordable Care Act support
    Public and VA hospitals
    Public Schools
    Public (state) universities
    Public libraries
    Public parks
    Public Transportation
    Police and Fire departments
    Public roads
    Public airports
    FEMA
    Public legal services
    Which ones must we do away with in order to become pure?
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  15. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    31,125
    Likes Received:
    4,649
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What heap of malarkey. The primary concern of the founders was that everyone would have the opportunity to become rich f they so choose. It was not to make sure that no one ever became rich. In fact the founders went to great lengths to ensure that the government, at least on the federal level would never be able to seize the property of any of it's citizenry with out adequate compensation. There was no such organization as FEMA for the first 100+ years of this country's existence. In fact fema not corporations were the first attempt to do that of which the left constantly complains inaccurately of corporations that is to make public the private losses incurred by individuals
     
  16. Jestsayin

    Jestsayin Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    8,654
    Likes Received:
    6,733
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe it would be easier for you to understand it you repeated my fulll quote.

    As for Korea,
    https://www.upi.com/North-Korean-re...itional-socialist-party-system/9101524104260/
     
  17. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    11,469
    Likes Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Everybody? Even those who were born into poor families and couldn't afford college to study and better their lives? Looks like thom founders were some real pinkos!

    Compensation? Did the government ask the taxpayers every time they gave these handouts? Sounds like redistributon of wealth to me!. Those commies! They could just as well put a statue of Marx in the Capitol Building, couldn't they?

    So you're saying we've only been a socialist nation for the last 100+ years of our history.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  18. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    31,125
    Likes Received:
    4,649
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm talking about the founding of the country you know a hundred plus years before there was a Federal income tax. The Sixteenth amendments which was necessary for their to be an income tax doesn't show up until 1916.

    And what we have now isn't socialism however much you wish to pretend otherwise, it is far more akin to Mussolini's fascism than it is anything to do with socialism. IN fact most of the west operates a system that where the rubber meets the road far more resembles fascism than socialism.
     
    Idahojunebug77 likes this.
  19. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    11,469
    Likes Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because I didn't mention Venezuela? Also a Republic, you know. A Dictatorial Republic. Used to be a Democratic Republic until its President started to grab power away from Congress, disparage the Press and appoint only loyalist judges who would protect him.... Stayed in power because his loyal followers, in a cultish fashion, decided to act "blind" to his many crimes. Now.... who does that remind me of...?
     
    Adfundum, OldGuy?wise and Derideo_Te like this.
  20. Jestsayin

    Jestsayin Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    8,654
    Likes Received:
    6,733
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Keep pushing that crap but nobody's buying it.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Socialist_Party_of_Venezuela
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  21. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    19,534
    Likes Received:
    4,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ok, so you're doubled-down here now. How about spelling out your description of socialism so we can see how accurate it is. This should be good!
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  22. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    19,534
    Likes Received:
    4,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Your confusing "social", i.e. public, services with an economic system in which the working class does in fact own and control the "means of production".
     
    Pycckia and roorooroo like this.
  23. scarlet witch

    scarlet witch Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Messages:
    7,810
    Likes Received:
    4,433
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    :roflol: this is your understanding of socialism....take and give :lol:
     
  24. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    31,125
    Likes Received:
    4,649
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you equate socialism with an idea that has never operated in any country in the world to any great extent and likely never will. They tried that in Plymouth colony when they first landed, and damn near everyone starved. "The Tragedy of the Commons" would detail nicely the error of your view were you not so blinded by your ideology. Another way of saying the same thing is that in any large group of people that which is everyone's responsibility is in reality no one's responsibility.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  25. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    19,534
    Likes Received:
    4,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In 1776 and later the politicians were farmers who also served the country in office at the same time. They derived their income from farming. Costs to run the country were covered by excise taxes. And as the government developed and the nation grew, governing eventually became a full-time job and paychecks were needed. Actually the income tax showed up in 1912 but I won't quibble over 4 years. https://photobucket.com/gallery/user/OnlyObvious/media/bWVkaWFJZDoxNzkxNTE5Mw==/?ref=

    Wow! We finally agree on something!
     

Share This Page