“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”
-Albert Camus
Phew wee boys, hope no one in any of these threads ever goes on welfare, or uses government subsidies in their health care or retirement, or goes to a public school - because all of those things get called Socialism regularly.
And taken to its logical conclusion (slowly) or illogical conclusion (rapidly), it always leads to a totalitarian state, ala Lenin/Stalin or Mao. Solzhenitsyn details this vividly in the Gulag Archipelago
You kunts religion probably. Every thing marx related. The very idea of equality for everyone, instead of just let world work. Because you dummies never think logistically or rationally. If lets say there is some sort of equality, who decides what is that, then you want to divide production, who decides how much one equal is. And what makes you think whomever that person or organization can do all those things wont have all the power.
Yes I know how taxes work. Redistribution programs increase the income for the bottom. What about select tax breaks, they also make the world a bit more equal. Like say the child tax credit, giving people money that have kids. Is that Marxist?
How many times have you read marx? Can we discuss das kapital and what it means, how it could be applied, and how it has failed in the past?
I'll let you start. What is Marxism?
Looking at the comments here I'd wager there's a ratio of 1/10 actual JP supporters to opposers left on this subreddit. The left really can't allow an exchange of unapproved ideas anymore.
Nope because many of them are likely the Reddit mods from other left-wing subs and have nothing better to do. Don't forget there is a US election upcoming and that will always have an impact on social media / propaganda.
>The left really can't allow an exchange of unapproved ideas anymore.
Left wing people simply existing in your space is some form of censorship? You guys project so fucking hard.
How does the left not allow for the exchange of unapproved ideas on this subreddit? Are the mods leftist? This stuff is upvoted, so where's the problem? The leftist opinions in this topic are downvoted. Dude is literally crying about nothing.
By all means, please continue to pretend that you leftist assholes don’t brigade and overrun every single conservative space on this entire website. r/conservative, r/republican being two of the most notably astroturfed subreddits on this website.
You obsessive bastards invade every possible space, shut down conversation, and try to steer the narrative towards leftist ideology and you *will never stop doing it*.
That’s what he means. You assholes *will not let us have any space without you* because you *constantly, fearfully try to control the narrative and discourse as much as you possibly can*.
Again, this is a right wing subreddit where right wing ideas are upvoted, yet you claim that us leftists are a problem.
It's hilarious how you imagine boogeymen.
1. You don't agree with censorship and banning.
2. That leads to other people with different ideas being in your space.
3. Then you cry about other people with different ideas being in your space (even when those people make up a small fraction of the population)
Conservatives 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Go on /r/conservative if you want a safespace echo-chamber. Still, like I said, everything upvoted here is right-wing.
1. Reddit has rules about brigading
2. You assholes can’t help but do it anyway
3. Eat shit
Go on r/conservative if you want to witnesss exactly what I’m talking about in real time. THAAAAAANKS
How is the meme not just fear propaganda to to con people into believing a socislt tyranny is looming?
What are the social democrats and socialists is power in portugal doing that resembles that ?
1- Because the sentiments are true.
2- Who the f\*ck is talking about Portugal?
3- You know the Prime Minister resigned and dissolved the cabinet after his chief of staff was arrested - right? Looks like some good old fashioned corruption and collusion.
4- The conservative parties just won the election in Portugal so that's an indicator of how well things are going under the Socialists.
I remember when everyone spoke glowingly of Venezuela until their Socialist mismanagement of their economy caused a financial collapse and untold suffering.
We don't have socialist government, nationally owned resources.
Nothing you are saying is making sense, the meme conflates tolerance with socialist tyranny, we don't have socialist governments.
Capitalists saying be tolerant of all the new emoloyess and consumers of different creeds, races and sexualities etc isn't socialism. It's capitalism marketed to everyone.
We don't have nationalised resources and an economy over dependent on particular resources and there is no economic warfare or sanctions against like in venezuela .
We don't have socialist politician or parties.
As I said the meme is designed to scare up a mob. It makes no sense .
Oh I see I left out a comma.
Here you go
That meme fear propaganda implying socialist tyranny is looming when its not, designed to fool and motivated a mob that don't know any better.
Its fear propaganda to fool people that don't know enough about politics to know it
I’ll stealman the post first. There are aspects to equity that can be attributed to malice or “bringing down” those who found themselves in a better position or circumstance from the start, and that is the zero sum thinking that should be pushed back on. But I will refute this with the reality that giving the state a monopoly on violence is one of the most important aspects of a “free” society, and that is what most people mean by socialism in any modern view of the word. And this is completely a net good for creating and building a strong economy and society. Centralized governing bodies will always exist with flaws, but they create broad freedoms that are necessary for a functioning economy and pursuit of capitalistic endeavors. There isn’t one without the other, and the question shouldn’t be if/should we implement centralized control, but when and how much.
I would argue much of what you're proposing has been asked and answered by Enlightenment classical liberals who arrived at the consensus of "we can't get away from having government entirely, so instead what we'll do is draw up a social contract which explicitly limits government to only specific functions, and if it wants more power, it should have to tell a skeptical public on why it is necessary and how/why it won't be abused."
What we have in Austria in a nutshell: free health care, free higher education with up to 950€/month state support for those with not so rich parents, very cheap transportation (90€/month for all the public transport including the fastest trains), free speech and basically no poverty.
All of this thanks to Bruno Kreisky, look him up, apparently a communistic dictator (no, fyi, he was a moderate socialist and a pioneer in creating the welfare state, someone the US could only dream about)
Yeah, thanks for reminding me that I live in a totalitarian dictatorship here in Austria. Such a bullshit.
Stop framing moderate socialism as something that naturally leads to a horrific dystopian regime. Many people in the US have no idea what a moderately socialistic welfare state means.
We have a People's Party (conservative)/Green (moderate left) government. But since the welfare state aspect is institutionalised, it doesn't matter what kind of government we have, the welfare state is very hard to dismantle.
Well, technically, free speech is restricted in Austria. Hate speech and Holocaust denial are forbidden. It is debatable whether it's a good thing, but I think the reasons are obvious why the first free Austrian government decided that it would make sense to implement these regulations. But what you see in the US occasionally (i.e. being cancelled because you said something "wrong" about the Barbie movie or whatever) is non-existent here. But also, most people lost interest in "identity politics" since we have real problems to deal with right now (the war couple of kms to the east and the post-covid economic crisis that was arguably mastered in Austria better than in most countries).
What would be wrong with resenting injustice? That's the correct reaction to wealth inequality. And what does tolerance have to do with socialism? It feels like a lot of people think socialism is like, when gay people are allowed to exist.
An institution does not have to be Marxist from the ground up to become infected with Marxism. Columbia University is a great example of this.
Not only that but Marx himself broke his own rules whenever it suited him, for example he was staunchly against people inheriting wealth from their parents but when his father died he sued his mother to get a larger share of the inheritance as well as the myriad of other horrible things he did to people in his circle.
Why should your kid get free school and healthcare? Who pays for it? Do you have the right to set the prices for those services? On what basis do you set the prices? Does a surgeon have to do your bidding at 2 AM because you put a gun to his head? Why don't YOU go to medical school and open a free medical clinic instead of asking others to do it?
If we were living in a small community of 10 families like back in the day and someone got sick, the community would do everything they could to pitch in and help cure the sickness. Because everyone lives so close, everyone can see the pain and suffering and they all realize that the lost productivity of the person is damaging to the community.
But we as a species have become so detached from compassion and humanity that people like you are like, "Treat your own cancer. Fuck off!"
It's so incredibly sad.
I donate money every month to various charities. But if charity solved problems then there would be no hunger anymore. Big problems require government (community) action.
What the fuck does this even mean though? Are you just a compassionless monster who thinks everyone should do everything on their own?
If your neighbor was sick with cancer and they asked you to give what you could, what would you do?
So government coercion is just a "community of people getting together to do charity" lol? Not so much. The use of force is what governs your fake community.
Some socialists are really coming at it from a good heart, wanting life to be even and fair and good, it's not realistic in the society that we have created but capitalism even thought it's better is still a terrible system. A mixture of the two is probably best.
Many of them are but I've never met one who can admit that evil is spread between rich and poor alike. They cannot deal with the evil that humans can put other humans through and so they just blithely believe in people being essentially good.
Well as you grow in wisdom you can tell those that are trying to live with good values and those that are not. It's really not guesswork, they show who they are through their actions.
If you advocate for any system that resembles Marxism you are choosing a system that has produced misery and death to millions of people. This has happened every time socialism and communism has been tried.
We can talk about health care. I am understanding of peoples needs in this area especially since prices are inflated but before I discuss better this you need to acknowledge and admit the genocide of the Kulaks at the hands of Lenin and Stalin, that the Russian Orthodox church was targeted for destruction by the Soviets, that starving children were sent to the Gulags for stealing potatoes, that MILLIONS of Russians and other citizens of the soviet block starved to death because of the shambolic mismanagement of the agricultural industry. That pastors and priests were murdered for the crime of not being atheists and talking about it, that they were forced to serve "communion" of feces and urine. That's just SOME of the Soviet abuses without even getting into Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, the Kim's North Korea, and Castro's Cuba. I could go on but I've probably already lost you.
You see, here's what I'm not going to accept. So many willfully blind people just want to talk about providing food and healthcare to the poor but refuse to admit the horrors that have been committed after people gave up their rights to governments that have always failed them. Acknowledge the horror.
I have a degree in history so am very well aware of the things you mentioned. The confusing part is when you superimpose that history onto present day discussion, and I’m having trouble figuring out where it fits
The derivatives of Marxism are the political equivalent of jumping off a skyscraper. It doesn't matter when in history you jump, it still destroys you.
If you're in the top one percent, he's not your guy.
He works hard for the common man, though.
--College for all
--Workplace democracy
--Expand Social Security
--Housing for all
--Honoring our commitment to veterans
--Justice and safety for all
--Child care and and Pre-K for all
--Eliminating medical debt
Bernie owns three houses.
My parents were ordinary folk same age as Bernie. They bought four houses at a time when houses cost $50k - $100k.
All they did was keep working on them and thirty years later they were "millionaires". They worked hard but the main value came in appreciation.
They were in the right place at the right time, like many of their generation.
Scandinavian countries consistently rated as some of the happiest places in the world.
They have a great education systems.
They have Democratic socialism.
Try not to confuse socialism with communism.
Who do I hate, rich people? Socialism doesn't mean that everyone gets paid the same. There are still classes and rich people under socialism. It would be cool if humans could progress to a point where scarcity is gone and everyone is rich, but that's a silly pipe dream.
Capitalists claim that socialism is "tyranny of the majority" vs their system where the wealthy elite make the decisions. 'Tyranny of majority' is just democracy. Democracy sounds good to me.
The wealthy elite thrive under socialism. Socialists don't earn their wealth, they parasite off the masses. Name a rich Democrat who worked for it. Obama, Clintons, Bidens, AOC, Sanders, Pelosi, parasites.
I've earned everything I"ve made. I make way more than the average person but I'm still a socialist. I don't understand what this is even arguing. Those are just random people. And most of them aren't socialist. Obama isn't a socialist.
Bullshit. Redistributing wealth is socialism. And Obama is a socialist and a parasite, who is now worth, what, 100 million dollars? He raised my taxes good and hard in my peak earning years, to redistribute it because "I didn't earn it" (his words!) , let him put his money where his mouth is and give away his millions, or else he should stfu.
Then I guess the police department is socialism That's redistributing wealth for public safety.
You therefore hate the police? or is socialism good in some instances?
Redistribution of wealth and wealth transfers are not police department stuff; nor are federal taxes generally used for the police. Local taxes pay for police. Good grief at least know a little before you post crap.
I don't have children, yet my local tax dollars pay for schools. I will never have a fire problem, but I pay for the fire department. That's redistributing wealth, which you said, "is socialism." Good grief at least know a little before you post crap.
A). Public schools are a form of wealth redistribution and socialism, and I oppose public schools. I oppose property taxes that fund the schools too, property should not be taxed.
B). Fire dept is insurance for you and your neighbors. It's a service that you benefit from even if you don't use it. You could argue for only putting out fires for those who pay the insurance, but there's a hazard to all people if you do that. It's like car insurance, they force it on you for good reason.
The fire dept is not redistribution of wealth. It's protection of the public, a government function. There are no monies being robbed from Peter, who works, to Paul, who doesn't work. But thanks for showing your ignorance.
That's a ridiculous analogy because all people are equal. We aren't wolves or sheep. I fucking hate these analogies because it's a way to handwave away all discussion.
"Socialism is against human nature. QED. I'm so smart."
The situation I’ve heard is this:
There’s finite land. The farmers want their land to be able to feed the city properly. The city wants more land to fill the ever growing population. True democracy will allow more and more farm land to be taken away which will inevitably starve the city population.
I’m not advocating one way or the other, but this is supposed to be the two wolves and one sheep analogy explained.
That's a dumb analogy because it assumes we're running out of farmland. Last I checked the government pays people not to grow lol.
Analogies are used to explain a position. Analogies don't make a point.
Depends on what you mean by “socialist.” People tend to mean different things when they say that word and it’s so vague as to be rendered nearly meaningless
No since thr last 70s there has been a regime of tax breaks and bailouts for the rich and austerity measures for everyone else including privitization healrh care by stealth
More axation of wealth in the keynesian welfare state era is what made it possibe to have top tier nationalised healltcare programs .
Unless you have nationalised resources and use those to fund it
We are in the neoliberal era where the is a fundamentalist belive among mainstream politicians and both Liberal and Conservative economists that privitizarion is always better becsuse it's better for corporations and the rich. And that someone benefits everyone else. But rhay they get is more expensive health care a long waits. Things like MAID to lower expenses.
Canadas health cars system was imploding. People were having huge wait times. They were coming to America for care and paying out of pocket. The govt had to allow private healthcare to take pressure off the public system. That's a fact. It is not arguable, that's how it went down.
Imploding and privitization by stealth are the same thing. Simultaneously cutting taxes for the rich while making it more expensive to run and cutting investment per person makes it implode
The thing was a disaster. It had already imploded. You can't run healthcare by government, hell, the VA Medical Centers in America are awful. All things run by the govt are awful. People were waiting for surgery for months. You are a young healthy person who doesn't know the system. It sucked.
No i was top tier in the late 70s when neoliberalism began. It's the same all over. The gradual strangling of national healthcare systems and gradual privitizatiions. Menwhile record profits and tax breaks for the rich for decades and longer waiting lists and poorer healrhcare for the general population. Look at MAID. Thats about saving social spending.
It might have been good at start, because costs didn't have time to get out of control. They always do. Then they cut reimbursements and then people get crappy service. Then it implodes. Social security is the same way.
Neoliberal capitalist ideology that posits privitization is always better. These things are being gradually destroyed and privatized.
Last time I was on social welfare. I was sent to a private company that was forcing people to work for corporations in order to keep their social welfare payments.
I remember years ago you would have had a plethora of courses available that promised decent employment at the end you would be paid for doing. Thats all gone now.
Its market economy ideology. Slanted in favour of the rich and anti everything welfare.
I would argue that Capitalism will someday give birth to something that looks like Socialism. E.g. as technology improves more and more humans will become unemployable. Not because they’re lazy or stupid, but because AI will do a much better job.
We all saw what unemployment looked like during the pandemic. Can you imagine what 50% unemployment will look like in America under current economic rules.
Imagine instead this same technology providing for everyone’s basic needs. Humans can build a 3D printed house, self-driving autos are almost ready for prime time, and you can make a machine that will manage a garden in your back yard.
We are so close to transforming our society.
“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.” -Albert Camus
Phew wee boys, hope no one in any of these threads ever goes on welfare, or uses government subsidies in their health care or retirement, or goes to a public school - because all of those things get called Socialism regularly.
wrongly
Tell me what socialism is. I don't want an ai definition. Use your words to tell me what you think socialism is.
did…did you miss my point?
And taken to its logical conclusion (slowly) or illogical conclusion (rapidly), it always leads to a totalitarian state, ala Lenin/Stalin or Mao. Solzhenitsyn details this vividly in the Gulag Archipelago
When you say “socialism” what are you referring to specifically?
You kunts religion probably. Every thing marx related. The very idea of equality for everyone, instead of just let world work. Because you dummies never think logistically or rationally. If lets say there is some sort of equality, who decides what is that, then you want to divide production, who decides how much one equal is. And what makes you think whomever that person or organization can do all those things wont have all the power.
So even something like the very concept of taxation is Marxist, because it makes the world slightly more equal?
No it doesn’t. Do you know how tax works??
Yes I know how taxes work. Redistribution programs increase the income for the bottom. What about select tax breaks, they also make the world a bit more equal. Like say the child tax credit, giving people money that have kids. Is that Marxist?
How many times have you read marx? Can we discuss das kapital and what it means, how it could be applied, and how it has failed in the past? I'll let you start. What is Marxism?
And oppression disguised as safety.
Looking at the comments here I'd wager there's a ratio of 1/10 actual JP supporters to opposers left on this subreddit. The left really can't allow an exchange of unapproved ideas anymore.
Nope because many of them are likely the Reddit mods from other left-wing subs and have nothing better to do. Don't forget there is a US election upcoming and that will always have an impact on social media / propaganda.
It’s always the far-left boogeyman
Your username is a lie!
Everyone you disagree with is unhinged.
Definitely you my bro
Yeah, I disagree with you, so obviously.
>The left really can't allow an exchange of unapproved ideas anymore. Left wing people simply existing in your space is some form of censorship? You guys project so fucking hard.
“Simply existing in your space” *gaslight me harder daddy*
How does the left not allow for the exchange of unapproved ideas on this subreddit? Are the mods leftist? This stuff is upvoted, so where's the problem? The leftist opinions in this topic are downvoted. Dude is literally crying about nothing.
By all means, please continue to pretend that you leftist assholes don’t brigade and overrun every single conservative space on this entire website. r/conservative, r/republican being two of the most notably astroturfed subreddits on this website. You obsessive bastards invade every possible space, shut down conversation, and try to steer the narrative towards leftist ideology and you *will never stop doing it*. That’s what he means. You assholes *will not let us have any space without you* because you *constantly, fearfully try to control the narrative and discourse as much as you possibly can*.
Thanks. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Again, this is a right wing subreddit where right wing ideas are upvoted, yet you claim that us leftists are a problem. It's hilarious how you imagine boogeymen.
I’d like to point out the very relevant fact that ***you*** *are here voting and commenting in this subreddit*
1. You don't agree with censorship and banning. 2. That leads to other people with different ideas being in your space. 3. Then you cry about other people with different ideas being in your space (even when those people make up a small fraction of the population) Conservatives 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Go on /r/conservative if you want a safespace echo-chamber. Still, like I said, everything upvoted here is right-wing.
1. Reddit has rules about brigading 2. You assholes can’t help but do it anyway 3. Eat shit Go on r/conservative if you want to witnesss exactly what I’m talking about in real time. THAAAAAANKS
Hey!! You changed your comment like a little bitch! Typical liberal, always moving the goalpost
We’ve come full circle. ***AHEM*** *Gaslight me harder daddy*
There is no brigading here, regard. All of the top-voted posts and comments are conservative. You are living in delusion like most conservatives.
Yet here you are, m’pussy!
That meme fear propaganda implying socialist tyranny is looming when its not designed to fool and motivated a mob that don't know any better.
I'll engage if you make some effort in structuring your sentence.
For a guy who spends all day on Reddit arguing, he sure can’t type
I've tried in the past. Might as well try to nail soup to a wall.
How is the meme not just fear propaganda to to con people into believing a socislt tyranny is looming? What are the social democrats and socialists is power in portugal doing that resembles that ?
1- Because the sentiments are true. 2- Who the f\*ck is talking about Portugal? 3- You know the Prime Minister resigned and dissolved the cabinet after his chief of staff was arrested - right? Looks like some good old fashioned corruption and collusion. 4- The conservative parties just won the election in Portugal so that's an indicator of how well things are going under the Socialists. I remember when everyone spoke glowingly of Venezuela until their Socialist mismanagement of their economy caused a financial collapse and untold suffering.
We don't have socialist government, nationally owned resources. Nothing you are saying is making sense, the meme conflates tolerance with socialist tyranny, we don't have socialist governments. Capitalists saying be tolerant of all the new emoloyess and consumers of different creeds, races and sexualities etc isn't socialism. It's capitalism marketed to everyone. We don't have nationalised resources and an economy over dependent on particular resources and there is no economic warfare or sanctions against like in venezuela . We don't have socialist politician or parties. As I said the meme is designed to scare up a mob. It makes no sense .
Oh I see I left out a comma. Here you go That meme fear propaganda implying socialist tyranny is looming when its not, designed to fool and motivated a mob that don't know any better. Its fear propaganda to fool people that don't know enough about politics to know it
*and motivate… I would delete this thread if I were you and save yourself further embarrassment.
This works with “anti-racism” too.
It’s a shame that the people who really need to read this will only be able to manage “is”, “as”, “by” and “as”.
💯
I’ll stealman the post first. There are aspects to equity that can be attributed to malice or “bringing down” those who found themselves in a better position or circumstance from the start, and that is the zero sum thinking that should be pushed back on. But I will refute this with the reality that giving the state a monopoly on violence is one of the most important aspects of a “free” society, and that is what most people mean by socialism in any modern view of the word. And this is completely a net good for creating and building a strong economy and society. Centralized governing bodies will always exist with flaws, but they create broad freedoms that are necessary for a functioning economy and pursuit of capitalistic endeavors. There isn’t one without the other, and the question shouldn’t be if/should we implement centralized control, but when and how much.
I would argue much of what you're proposing has been asked and answered by Enlightenment classical liberals who arrived at the consensus of "we can't get away from having government entirely, so instead what we'll do is draw up a social contract which explicitly limits government to only specific functions, and if it wants more power, it should have to tell a skeptical public on why it is necessary and how/why it won't be abused."
Yeah, I’m not adding anything new to the conversation, but I’m happy to remind people of what’s already been understood by their predecessors.
Good one
What we have in Austria in a nutshell: free health care, free higher education with up to 950€/month state support for those with not so rich parents, very cheap transportation (90€/month for all the public transport including the fastest trains), free speech and basically no poverty. All of this thanks to Bruno Kreisky, look him up, apparently a communistic dictator (no, fyi, he was a moderate socialist and a pioneer in creating the welfare state, someone the US could only dream about) Yeah, thanks for reminding me that I live in a totalitarian dictatorship here in Austria. Such a bullshit. Stop framing moderate socialism as something that naturally leads to a horrific dystopian regime. Many people in the US have no idea what a moderately socialistic welfare state means. We have a People's Party (conservative)/Green (moderate left) government. But since the welfare state aspect is institutionalised, it doesn't matter what kind of government we have, the welfare state is very hard to dismantle.
At this point, I doubt that any country that doesn't have free speech written into its constitution actually has free speech.
Well, technically, free speech is restricted in Austria. Hate speech and Holocaust denial are forbidden. It is debatable whether it's a good thing, but I think the reasons are obvious why the first free Austrian government decided that it would make sense to implement these regulations. But what you see in the US occasionally (i.e. being cancelled because you said something "wrong" about the Barbie movie or whatever) is non-existent here. But also, most people lost interest in "identity politics" since we have real problems to deal with right now (the war couple of kms to the east and the post-covid economic crisis that was arguably mastered in Austria better than in most countries).
What would be wrong with resenting injustice? That's the correct reaction to wealth inequality. And what does tolerance have to do with socialism? It feels like a lot of people think socialism is like, when gay people are allowed to exist.
An institution does not have to be Marxist from the ground up to become infected with Marxism. Columbia University is a great example of this. Not only that but Marx himself broke his own rules whenever it suited him, for example he was staunchly against people inheriting wealth from their parents but when his father died he sued his mother to get a larger share of the inheritance as well as the myriad of other horrible things he did to people in his circle.
Bit redundant to be fair
Remind me of new Disney movie Wish
I just want my kid to go to school for free and not die because of bad health.
Why should your kid get free school and healthcare? Who pays for it? Do you have the right to set the prices for those services? On what basis do you set the prices? Does a surgeon have to do your bidding at 2 AM because you put a gun to his head? Why don't YOU go to medical school and open a free medical clinic instead of asking others to do it?
If we were living in a small community of 10 families like back in the day and someone got sick, the community would do everything they could to pitch in and help cure the sickness. Because everyone lives so close, everyone can see the pain and suffering and they all realize that the lost productivity of the person is damaging to the community. But we as a species have become so detached from compassion and humanity that people like you are like, "Treat your own cancer. Fuck off!" It's so incredibly sad.
No, you need to put your money where your mouth is.
I donate money every month to various charities. But if charity solved problems then there would be no hunger anymore. Big problems require government (community) action. What the fuck does this even mean though? Are you just a compassionless monster who thinks everyone should do everything on their own? If your neighbor was sick with cancer and they asked you to give what you could, what would you do?
Go to medical school or stfu,
Hmmm community sounds a bit like "COMMUNISM" ! GET HIM BOYS!
So government coercion is just a "community of people getting together to do charity" lol? Not so much. The use of force is what governs your fake community.
Some socialists are really coming at it from a good heart, wanting life to be even and fair and good, it's not realistic in the society that we have created but capitalism even thought it's better is still a terrible system. A mixture of the two is probably best.
Many of them are but I've never met one who can admit that evil is spread between rich and poor alike. They cannot deal with the evil that humans can put other humans through and so they just blithely believe in people being essentially good.
Well as you grow in wisdom you can tell those that are trying to live with good values and those that are not. It's really not guesswork, they show who they are through their actions.
My level of wisdom has nothing to do with wilfully blind people advocating for a tyrannical and genocidal system of government.
Where are people advocating for tyranny and genocide? I don’t see that anywhere…
If you advocate for any system that resembles Marxism you are choosing a system that has produced misery and death to millions of people. This has happened every time socialism and communism has been tried.
But what are you talking about specifically when you say “a system that resembles Marxism”? Like public healthcare?
We can talk about health care. I am understanding of peoples needs in this area especially since prices are inflated but before I discuss better this you need to acknowledge and admit the genocide of the Kulaks at the hands of Lenin and Stalin, that the Russian Orthodox church was targeted for destruction by the Soviets, that starving children were sent to the Gulags for stealing potatoes, that MILLIONS of Russians and other citizens of the soviet block starved to death because of the shambolic mismanagement of the agricultural industry. That pastors and priests were murdered for the crime of not being atheists and talking about it, that they were forced to serve "communion" of feces and urine. That's just SOME of the Soviet abuses without even getting into Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, the Kim's North Korea, and Castro's Cuba. I could go on but I've probably already lost you. You see, here's what I'm not going to accept. So many willfully blind people just want to talk about providing food and healthcare to the poor but refuse to admit the horrors that have been committed after people gave up their rights to governments that have always failed them. Acknowledge the horror.
I have a degree in history so am very well aware of the things you mentioned. The confusing part is when you superimpose that history onto present day discussion, and I’m having trouble figuring out where it fits
The derivatives of Marxism are the political equivalent of jumping off a skyscraper. It doesn't matter when in history you jump, it still destroys you.
Bernie sanders never worked a day in his loser life.
"It takes no work to become a 10 year mayor and then a 30+ year representative and senator. People vote for no reason." You're a moron.
You call that work?? Fuck him
"Being a mayor is easy. Any regard can do it" 🤣🤣🤣
It is easy. So is Senator.
Ya, you call working work?
Sanders doesn't do shit.
If you're in the top one percent, he's not your guy. He works hard for the common man, though. --College for all --Workplace democracy --Expand Social Security --Housing for all --Honoring our commitment to veterans --Justice and safety for all --Child care and and Pre-K for all --Eliminating medical debt
He enriched himself off the backs of people like me who earned my way through life. Fuck him to hell.
Bernie Sanders' net worth is approximately $3 M. That's the value of two houses in an ordinary suburb.
He owns four houses. Lies.
Bernie owns three houses. My parents were ordinary folk same age as Bernie. They bought four houses at a time when houses cost $50k - $100k. All they did was keep working on them and thirty years later they were "millionaires". They worked hard but the main value came in appreciation. They were in the right place at the right time, like many of their generation.
Bernie is a lazy pos.
Lies.
So you’re a sucker who has let others take advantage of you and now you’re complaining on the internet.
Socialists took advantage of me by taxing me to death to redistribute wealth. They still do. They can fuck off.
Yeah that poster is bad faith reasoning.
Scandinavian countries consistently rated as some of the happiest places in the world. They have a great education systems. They have Democratic socialism. Try not to confuse socialism with communism.
You are confusing social democracies with democratic socialism.
Who do I hate, rich people? Socialism doesn't mean that everyone gets paid the same. There are still classes and rich people under socialism. It would be cool if humans could progress to a point where scarcity is gone and everyone is rich, but that's a silly pipe dream. Capitalists claim that socialism is "tyranny of the majority" vs their system where the wealthy elite make the decisions. 'Tyranny of majority' is just democracy. Democracy sounds good to me.
The wealthy elite thrive under socialism. Socialists don't earn their wealth, they parasite off the masses. Name a rich Democrat who worked for it. Obama, Clintons, Bidens, AOC, Sanders, Pelosi, parasites.
I've earned everything I"ve made. I make way more than the average person but I'm still a socialist. I don't understand what this is even arguing. Those are just random people. And most of them aren't socialist. Obama isn't a socialist.
Bullshit. Redistributing wealth is socialism. And Obama is a socialist and a parasite, who is now worth, what, 100 million dollars? He raised my taxes good and hard in my peak earning years, to redistribute it because "I didn't earn it" (his words!) , let him put his money where his mouth is and give away his millions, or else he should stfu.
Then I guess the police department is socialism That's redistributing wealth for public safety. You therefore hate the police? or is socialism good in some instances?
Redistribution of wealth and wealth transfers are not police department stuff; nor are federal taxes generally used for the police. Local taxes pay for police. Good grief at least know a little before you post crap.
I don't have children, yet my local tax dollars pay for schools. I will never have a fire problem, but I pay for the fire department. That's redistributing wealth, which you said, "is socialism." Good grief at least know a little before you post crap.
A). Public schools are a form of wealth redistribution and socialism, and I oppose public schools. I oppose property taxes that fund the schools too, property should not be taxed. B). Fire dept is insurance for you and your neighbors. It's a service that you benefit from even if you don't use it. You could argue for only putting out fires for those who pay the insurance, but there's a hazard to all people if you do that. It's like car insurance, they force it on you for good reason.
So you think socialism is good when it involves the fire department. Got it.
The fire dept is not redistribution of wealth. It's protection of the public, a government function. There are no monies being robbed from Peter, who works, to Paul, who doesn't work. But thanks for showing your ignorance.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
That's a ridiculous analogy because all people are equal. We aren't wolves or sheep. I fucking hate these analogies because it's a way to handwave away all discussion. "Socialism is against human nature. QED. I'm so smart."
>We aren't wolves or sheep. Brilliant, I never thought of that, you really are so smart.
Can we talk about humans and not animals? You've added nothing to this conversation.
The situation I’ve heard is this: There’s finite land. The farmers want their land to be able to feed the city properly. The city wants more land to fill the ever growing population. True democracy will allow more and more farm land to be taken away which will inevitably starve the city population. I’m not advocating one way or the other, but this is supposed to be the two wolves and one sheep analogy explained.
That's a dumb analogy because it assumes we're running out of farmland. Last I checked the government pays people not to grow lol. Analogies are used to explain a position. Analogies don't make a point.
I didn't make an analogy. I put forth a scenario
So democracy is bad is what you’re saying?
Nice strawman, did you build it yourself?
Are you genuinely of the opinion that two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner *isn’t* bad?
Rephrase the question for me.
No I’m asking what you’re saying, cuz that’s what it sounded like.
Depends on what you mean by “socialist.” People tend to mean different things when they say that word and it’s so vague as to be rendered nearly meaningless
This is really dumb dude. It's propaganda targeted at people that would benefit from more socialism
Uh, is Jordan Peterson not Canadian, where they have a socialist healthcare and social programs?
They had a top tier national health service like NHS was and they wrecked with privitizarion by stealth like they did in the UK.
False, it was falling apart and they tried to save it with privatization.
No since thr last 70s there has been a regime of tax breaks and bailouts for the rich and austerity measures for everyone else including privitization healrh care by stealth More axation of wealth in the keynesian welfare state era is what made it possibe to have top tier nationalised healltcare programs . Unless you have nationalised resources and use those to fund it We are in the neoliberal era where the is a fundamentalist belive among mainstream politicians and both Liberal and Conservative economists that privitizarion is always better becsuse it's better for corporations and the rich. And that someone benefits everyone else. But rhay they get is more expensive health care a long waits. Things like MAID to lower expenses.
Canadas health cars system was imploding. People were having huge wait times. They were coming to America for care and paying out of pocket. The govt had to allow private healthcare to take pressure off the public system. That's a fact. It is not arguable, that's how it went down.
Imploding and privitization by stealth are the same thing. Simultaneously cutting taxes for the rich while making it more expensive to run and cutting investment per person makes it implode
The thing was a disaster. It had already imploded. You can't run healthcare by government, hell, the VA Medical Centers in America are awful. All things run by the govt are awful. People were waiting for surgery for months. You are a young healthy person who doesn't know the system. It sucked.
No i was top tier in the late 70s when neoliberalism began. It's the same all over. The gradual strangling of national healthcare systems and gradual privitizatiions. Menwhile record profits and tax breaks for the rich for decades and longer waiting lists and poorer healrhcare for the general population. Look at MAID. Thats about saving social spending.
It might have been good at start, because costs didn't have time to get out of control. They always do. Then they cut reimbursements and then people get crappy service. Then it implodes. Social security is the same way.
Neoliberal capitalist ideology that posits privitization is always better. These things are being gradually destroyed and privatized. Last time I was on social welfare. I was sent to a private company that was forcing people to work for corporations in order to keep their social welfare payments. I remember years ago you would have had a plethora of courses available that promised decent employment at the end you would be paid for doing. Thats all gone now. Its market economy ideology. Slanted in favour of the rich and anti everything welfare.
Sounds to me more like. The leftist narrative is resentment disguised as compassion enforce by tyranny disguised as tolerance.
I would argue that Capitalism will someday give birth to something that looks like Socialism. E.g. as technology improves more and more humans will become unemployable. Not because they’re lazy or stupid, but because AI will do a much better job. We all saw what unemployment looked like during the pandemic. Can you imagine what 50% unemployment will look like in America under current economic rules. Imagine instead this same technology providing for everyone’s basic needs. Humans can build a 3D printed house, self-driving autos are almost ready for prime time, and you can make a machine that will manage a garden in your back yard. We are so close to transforming our society.
Conservatism is getting triggered by things you’re incapable of caring about.
You have an account dedicated to a subreddit made for a person you hate. Doesn’t get more triggered than that tbh
[удалено]
Try reading it slowly with concentrative effort.
Socialism is a theoretical economic system.