Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* - - - - 3 votes

Traits of Socialism


  • Please log in to reply
151 replies to this topic

#31    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,661 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:17 PM

View PostRavenHawk, on 03 January 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

And you didn’t answer the question.  I make no discernment between the two because if you answer the question honestly, that will explain why.  But I don’t think that is possible for you


This country is a Republic, yet it is on the same path.  So don’t distract from the issue.  “Social Conservatism” is just a benevolent (for now) form of Totalitarianism.  In time, it will evolve into more restrictive forms.  It always has from the beginning of time.

Its impossible to discuss an issue with a person who doesn't understand the correct meaning of words and has an extremist libertarian perspective to boot.
All forms of government are somewhere on a continuum between anarchy and totalitarianism so whats your point exactly.

This is the problem with debates like this - unless you can learn to recognize and acknowledge basic facts there can be no progress, no exchange and no resolution.


Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 03 January 2013 - 07:34 PM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#32    Mr Right Wing

Mr Right Wing

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined:16 Nov 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 07:23 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 03 January 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

And here a meeting point between anarchy and the "right", though what is meant by right.....

Yes, as much freedom as possible.


#33    RavenHawk

RavenHawk

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 08:40 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 03 January 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

And this is the great debate (shouting match) between Kropotkin and Marx that has never been resolved. I see this as a struggle between the individual and the state at a macro level. Clearly we cannot live without any laws or co-operation between individuals and collectives, but it is a matter of balance and scale. For a long time the balance has been tilted to ever bigger states, which I see as wrong. I think the terminology has to change. Left and right are outdated, and who now even knows origins of these terms, both often become inseperable. Socialism has bad name in US in particular, and is mis-used in other countries, for instance various social-democratic parties in Europe that seem less and less democratic and never socialist in the first place. The terms used by anarchists will not be used because anarchists have bad name because of "useful idiots" in west who wear masks and riot and fly black flag that is not theirs to fly. I digress.....  
I have to say that all I know about Kropotkin is that he proposed that evolution is through cooperation and not competition.  It doesn’t take much to extrapolate this to apply to social, economic, and government.  To tell the truth, I always thought evolution was a combination as in yin & yang (masculine/feminine).  But I consider competition (masculine) as the driving force.  Evolution is an Innate Intelligence (as DD Palmer put it).  Nature knows what to do.  Not all mutations occur just to occur.  Chaos is not so random.  Mutations cooperate to form viable entities but the different entities compete with each other.  This is why Neanderthal died out (for example).  

Kropotkin wanted to do away with money, but that will never happen.  Money represents human time and effort spent.  Not everyone puts out the same time and effort so you need to represent that variation.  Inequality is inherent to the system because people are not equal.  The solution that Kropotkin was looking for was Adam Smith’s “The Invisible Hand” which in short is that everyone competes against everyone else, looking after their self interest and in by doing so, a cooperation occurs to better society.  If all government was out of the Free Market picture, the ‘fallacies of economic systems’ would disappear, provided that business and consumer were equal.  Then mutual cooperation would exist.  So the question becomes, how do you make business and consumer equal?  Since people are not?  It would take a well educated consumer.  The government could take a role in helping the people become aware and Promote the General Welfare.

I agree with you in that bigger states are wrong.  That is what is unique about the Constitution.  It didn’t usurp the power of the state.  As far as terminology having to change, that’s why I stick with Socialism as the boogeyman.  In today’s world, it just seems appropriate to represent Socialism and any form of government that leans toward more and more control over the people.  Oligarchy just doesn’t seem to cut it.  People only see Left or Right and can’t get beyond that to see that it’s Anarchy at one end and Totalitarianism at the other.  The Constitution was designed to prevent “spectrum creep”, a term I created to indentify the path a government takes as it approaches one end of the spectrum or the other.  But it’s the Left in this country that has found a way to go around the Constitution and drag it toward the Totalitarian end, just as most of the world is going.  I guess that makes it all ok.

Quote

Back to your quote "but when does it not?". It will not lead to totalitarianism if principals of Kropotkin are followed. Though I know the world is not ready, and may never be....
In essence I agree, but I don’t think that Kropotkin has the complete answer.  But this is the direction I think a debate should go.

*Signature removed* Forum Rules

#34    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,939 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 08:58 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 03 January 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Don't get hissy just because I pointed out the false premise.
When you really want to discuss the pros and cons of socialism give me a shout :tu:

Personally I think state communism has shown itgself to be a failure - but social democracy has a rather better track record.

Br Cornelius
Social democracy has a better track record than what?  Communism?    That's not saying much since communism's track record is disastrous.  

Why don't you discuss what you think the cons of Socialism are here (I've heard you speaking to no end about the pros already), and provide real examples of those cons in the world past or present, so I'm not getting a lot of fluffy rhetoric on political/economic theory.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#35    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:страна дураков

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:00 PM

Briefly, as it is very late for me. Dreams of Kropotkin need much higher technology than we have now. We need to be freed from industrial work. There is a vision of an agrarian world of small communities, but under the surface very hitech.


#36    RavenHawk

RavenHawk

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:03 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 03 January 2013 - 07:17 PM, said:

Its impossible to discuss an issue with a person who doesn't understand the correct meaning of words and has an extremist libertarian perspective to boot.
Just start with the excuses.  I love it!  The fact is that you are too hung up on definitions.  Ok, fine.  Try looking beyond the academic definitions and try understanding what is being talked about.  And answer the question.

Quote

All forms of government are somewhere on a continuum between anarchy and totalitarianism so whats your point exactly.
Yes, they are and you haven’t been following the gist of the conversation.  Every form of government starts on this spectrum somewhere but the tendency is to lean toward the Totalitarian end.  Our Constitution established a point somewhere at the opposite end from Totalitarianism but our current leadership is dragging the government toward Totalitarianism.

Quote

This is the problem with debates like this - unless you can learn to recognize and acknowledge basic facts there can be no progress, no exchange and no resolution.


Br Cornelius
It doesn’t matter that you can’t recognize and acknowledge the facts.  I’m still willing to educate and correct you.  If you want no resolution, you’re free not to peruse this thread.

*Signature removed* Forum Rules

#37    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,628 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:08 PM

View PostRavenHawk, on 03 January 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

Buzzzzzzzt!  Wrong.  Thank you for playing.  Socialism enables the environment for Totalitarianism.  They go hand-in-hand.

I don't know who tells you that crap.... but keep on making a spectacle out of yourself.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#38    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:09 PM

View PostRavenHawk, on 03 January 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

Absolutely!!!  I am trying to scare the Hell out of the sheeple and make them wake up.

Ah yes, the core of your argument that anyone who doesn't believe in your own personal view of the world is a mindless slave. I'm sure that holding this view as well as inventing your own definitions of political theories and practices will surely create open debate and bring everyone around...or they'll just roll their eyes and laugh at how you're freaking yourself out over nothing.

Bu hey what do I know, I'm not American so that means I don't know what freedom is right? :rolleyes:

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#39    RavenHawk

RavenHawk

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:29 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 03 January 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:

Briefly, as it is very late for me. Dreams of Kropotkin need much higher technology than we have now. We need to be freed from industrial work.
Sort of like the Krell of Altair IV??  :alien:

Quote

There is a vision of an agrarian world of small communities, but under the surface very hitech.
I saw an environmental movie (can’t recall the title) that seemed to push for that kind of lifestyle.  There was just something eerily wrong with it but I couldn’t put my finger on it.  As an example, it showed one little boy in a small jungle pond swimming and how happy he was.  But what was wrong with that is that with a 7 billion population and climbing, it wouldn’t be one boy swimming alone in a pond.  It would be those over crowed beaches.  I don’t think this world can return to that way of life anymore.

*Signature removed* Forum Rules

#40    Mr Right Wing

Mr Right Wing

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined:16 Nov 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:01 PM

View PostYamato, on 03 January 2013 - 08:58 PM, said:

Social democracy has a better track record than what?  Communism? That's not saying much since communism's track record is disastrous.  

Why don't you discuss what you think the cons of Socialism are here (I've heard you speaking to no end about the pros already), and provide real examples of those cons in the world past or present, so I'm not getting a lot of fluffy rhetoric on political/economic theory.

Socialism is based on a lie which is that all people are equals.

People are not all clones of each other they come in a wide range of ability and characteristics. When you pay them as equals (communism) those who are gifted become demotivated. The reason for that is they gain no advantage from working hard or going to university because they get paid exactly the same no matter what they do. Pretty soon the state becomes unproductive, uncompetitive, lacks innovations and folds like the USSR. A quick look at North Korea also shows they dont have two pennies to rub together.

In our country socialists invent crazy morally flawed programs where they tax the rich and spend the revenues on socialist projects for the poor. Why should our business owners, innovators and entreprenuers be penalised because lazy, dumb, incompetant fools are only good for shelf stacking and licking stamps?

Lets have a capitalist Utopia. Let the reds emmigrate and the state thats left behind will quickly rise to become the economic superpower of the world.

Edited by Mr Right Wing, 03 January 2013 - 10:02 PM.


#41    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 10,817 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:09 PM

But isn't it a truth that all men are created equal?
Isn't that in the Constitution?

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#42    RavenHawk

RavenHawk

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,093 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:07 PM

View PostWearer of Hats, on 03 January 2013 - 10:09 PM, said:

Isn't that in the Constitution?
Not exactly but you are close.  It is part of the Declaration of Independence which is within the same kind of thought.  ” We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…”

Quote

But isn't it a truth that all men are created equal?
Yes, but ‘created equal’ is in the context of unalienable Rights.  Meaning that no other man can grant or rescind these rights.  Even a slave is entitled to these Rights.  But where it stops is that one does not have the Right to his neighbor’s pocket book.  We are all created equal but how one utilizes his talents is up to him and that determines outcome which will not be the same for all.  How you live your life, how you use your liberty, and how you pursue happiness is up to you and that will be different than everyone else.

*Signature removed* Forum Rules

#43    Mr Right Wing

Mr Right Wing

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,924 posts
  • Joined:16 Nov 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:21 PM

View PostWearer of Hats, on 03 January 2013 - 10:09 PM, said:

But isn't it a truth that all men are created equal?
Isn't that in the Constitution?

The constitution is ideological not based on truths.

Men are not created equal by God because each person has there own unique dna.


#44    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 10,817 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 04 January 2013 - 12:03 AM

Besides, Socialism isn't "we are all paid the same because we're allthe same" it's meant to e "from each according to their skill, to each according to their need". The ideal is more Star Trek then Starsi.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#45    MiskatonicGrad

MiskatonicGrad

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dunwich USA

  • "the natural progress of things is liberty to yield and goverment to gain ground." Thomas Jefferson

Posted 04 January 2013 - 02:10 AM

this is what the left and socialist leaning people do they pull the Montoya " you keep using that word. I don't think that word means what you think it means" to confuse the issue or flat out avoid it. the whole point of this thread is goverment control call it what ever you want totalitarism, socialism, communism, or the freaking easter bunny is in charge. the point is is this something we want in this country the easy answer is hell yes look at the last 20 yrs. this country is leaning more and more towards goverment control of damn near every aspect of our lives. Is our constitution set up for a goverment that has that much control? No. can that be changed? yes will it? my answer to that is it doesn't need to be hardly anybody reads it and even fewer bother trying to get the goverment to stick to it. so the socialists out there will continue to bog you down in a definition war and try to pass off what they are selling as something else because you don't know what you are trying to say and don't understand what a socialist is.

so in the future don't ask if we want socialism ask if we want more and more goverment control of our lives. let the socialist argue what they want to call themselves and don't get bogged down.

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread" --Thomas Jefferson(1821)

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session"--Mark Twain(1866)

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson(1800)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users