Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #126 Share Posted February 7, 2020 Just now, RoofGardener said: And - once more - you duck the question. Define the difference between socialism and communism. I know the answer... but I don't think YOU do ? I know that I do. I don't know if you do. I don't care if you do. So why would I waste my time posting something we both (apparently) know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted February 7, 2020 #127 Share Posted February 7, 2020 I have to pipe in and say that these days on this forum: Socialism= Anything I disagree with. I've heard it apply to monarchies, dictatorships, all democrats, anything European, heck even Otto von Bismark. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #128 Share Posted February 7, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Gromdor said: I have to pipe in and say that these days on this forum: Socialism= Anything I disagree with. I've heard it apply to monarchies, dictatorships, all democrats, anything European, heck even Otto von Bismark. Pretty sure the main reason most of them dislike any comparison to Nazis is because it has the word 'socialist' in it... Edited February 7, 2020 by Setton 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoofGardener Posted February 7, 2020 #129 Share Posted February 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, Setton said: I know that I do. I don't know if you do. I don't care if you do. So why would I waste my time posting something we both (apparently) know? Evasion. I'm sure you KNOW what Socialism is, and its (close) relationship with communism. Why are you ashamed to say it out loud ? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #130 Share Posted February 7, 2020 Just now, RoofGardener said: Evasion. I'm sure you KNOW what Socialism is, and its (close) relationship with communism. Why are you ashamed to say it out loud ? Not at all. Just kind of enjoying how worked up you're getting over this pointless exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoofGardener Posted February 7, 2020 #131 Share Posted February 7, 2020 8 minutes ago, Setton said: Not at all. Just kind of enjoying how worked up you're getting over this pointless exercise. Worked up ? I'm having a cuppa tea and watching some new series on Netflix. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #132 Share Posted February 7, 2020 1 minute ago, RoofGardener said: Worked up ? I'm having a cuppa tea and watching some new series on Netflix. Glad you're not bothered about it either then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted February 7, 2020 #133 Share Posted February 7, 2020 2 hours ago, Setton said: Pretty sure the main reason most of them dislike any comparison to Nazis is because it has the word 'socialist' in it... "Hitler was a Socialist!" - favourite cry of Ravenhawk 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted February 7, 2020 #134 Share Posted February 7, 2020 2 hours ago, RoofGardener said: Evasion. I'm sure you KNOW what Socialism is, and its (close) relationship with communism. Why are you ashamed to say it out loud ? If you really do want an essay on the subject, socialism can essentially be thought of as like the programme of the postwar Labour party, i.e. healthcare, education and welfare and suchlike provided by the State, and also, to a greater or lesser extent, manufacturing and transport, while the essential feature of Communism is state control of manufacturing and agriculture - and also abolition of rival parties and of any real democracy apart from an occasional "democratic election" once in a while where there's always a 99.9% turnout and 98.9% of the vote always goes to the ruling party. While the 1945 Labour government did have rather a mania for taking industry and transport under state control, they didn't compulsorily nationalize all existing small businesses, and one thing they conspicuously failed to do was outlaw opposition parties and scrap elections, as they found out when the Tories came back in 1951. Similarly, communism almost always results in or is the result of a demagogic leader who wields sole, ruthless power over the Party and reduces whatever kind of parliament there may be to a mere rubber-stamping bureaucracy with no real power. And also tends to have a fondness for putting up huge posters of themselves. Clement Atlee was hardly Joe Stalin, or even Vladimir Lenin. This is a quick thumbnail sketch for now, which I hope you found helpful. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 7, 2020 #135 Share Posted February 7, 2020 socialism=no private property, everything owned by the state, examples cuba, north korea, venezuela, and yes hitler WAS a socialist, 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerBright19 Posted February 7, 2020 #136 Share Posted February 7, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, Setton said: You realise that only shows there are several potential democratic candidates and only one republican one, right? Presidents are allowed to serve two terms in office. There are no potential Republican candidates that can win against Trump. Not until 2024 when Trump finishes his second term. The bookies only list the top five candidates who are up against Trump. The other candidates are in the 100/1 range and not potential winners. Edited February 7, 2020 by Aaron2016 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #137 Share Posted February 7, 2020 51 minutes ago, Aaron2016 said: Presidents are allowed to serve two terms in office. There are no potential Republican candidates that can win against Trump. Not until 2024 when Trump finishes his second term. The bookies only list the top five candidates who are up against Trump. The other candidates are in the 100/1 range and not potential winners. Which is why Trump has such good odds. The election will be between Trump and one of those Democrats. Say it was a 50/50 spilt, Democrat and Republican. Trump would have a 50% chance of winning. But each of the Democratic candidates would have only a share of 50%. Once the Democrat candidate is selected, you'll see the odds change considerably. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #138 Share Posted February 7, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said: "Hitler was a Socialist!" - favourite cry of Ravenhawk Oh and he has company. 1 hour ago, aztek said: socialism=no private property, everything owned by the state, examples cuba, north korea, venezuela, and yes hitler WAS a socialist, Well it's in the name! Wonder what they make of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Must give them such a headache having 'democratic' and 'republic' in the same name... Edited February 7, 2020 by Setton 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #139 Share Posted February 7, 2020 1 hour ago, aztek said: socialism=no private property, everything owned by the state, That would be communism again. Quote and yes hitler WAS a socialist, NO HE WASN'T. Sorry, didn't realise this was one of those debates where the bigger you write it, the more true it is. Perhaps I should look into sky writing. Or giant carved stone letters. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setton Posted February 7, 2020 #140 Share Posted February 7, 2020 1 hour ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said: If you really do want an essay on the subject, socialism can essentially be thought of as like the programme of the postwar Labour party, i.e. healthcare, education and welfare and suchlike provided by the State, and also, to a greater or lesser extent, manufacturing and transport, while the essential feature of Communism is state control of manufacturing and agriculture - and also abolition of rival parties and of any real democracy apart from an occasional "democratic election" once in a while where there's always a 99.9% turnout and 98.9% of the vote always goes to the ruling party. While the 1945 Labour government did have rather a mania for taking industry and transport under state control, they didn't compulsorily nationalize all existing small businesses, and one thing they conspicuously failed to do was outlaw opposition parties and scrap elections, as they found out when the Tories came back in 1951. Similarly, communism almost always results in or is the result of a demagogic leader who wields sole, ruthless power over the Party and reduces whatever kind of parliament there may be to a mere rubber-stamping bureaucracy with no real power. And also tends to have a fondness for putting up huge posters of themselves. Clement Atlee was hardly Joe Stalin, or even Vladimir Lenin. This is a quick thumbnail sketch for now, which I hope you found helpful. Fine, give in to his mithering and spoil my fun then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted February 7, 2020 #141 Share Posted February 7, 2020 Once again for the record: Socialism- a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. So yes, you have private property. We have it in the US today in the form of the Fire Dept. Police, Sheriff's Dept, the military, public libraries, public transportation, public parking, municipal power plants, etc.... Communism- is a classless social system with one form of public ownership of the means of production and with full social equality of all members of society. No personal property. Everyone works for the colony like ants. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 7, 2020 #142 Share Posted February 7, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Gromdor said: Once again for the record: Socialism- a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. So yes, you have private property. We have it in the US today in the form of the Fire Dept. Police, Sheriff's Dept, the military, public libraries, public transportation, public parking, municipal power plants, etc.... Communism- is a classless social system with one form of public ownership of the means of production and with full social equality of all members of society. No personal property. Everyone works for the colony like ants. yea, in theory, but in reality is not anywhere close to what you describe police, fd, libraries.... etc. have nothing to do with socialism, Edited February 7, 2020 by aztek 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted February 7, 2020 #143 Share Posted February 7, 2020 Just now, aztek said: yea, in theory, but in reality is not not anywhere close to what you describe That's the definitions. What happens in reality isn't socialism or communism but just some twisted thing that people mislabel. (Usually Authoritarianism or Dictatorships) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 7, 2020 #144 Share Posted February 7, 2020 1 minute ago, Gromdor said: That's the definitions. What happens in reality isn't socialism or communism but just some twisted thing that people mislabel. (Usually Authoritarianism or Dictatorships) what happens in reality is what matters, book definitions do not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted February 7, 2020 #145 Share Posted February 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, aztek said: yea, in theory, but in reality is not anywhere close to what you describe police, fd, libraries.... etc. have nothing to do with socialism, They’ve got **** all to do with Democrscy as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 7, 2020 #146 Share Posted February 7, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said: They’ve got **** all to do with Democrscy as well. no they are not, they are public services that exist in every system, and are not unique to any system. Edited February 7, 2020 by aztek 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted February 7, 2020 #147 Share Posted February 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, aztek said: what happens in reality is what matters, book definitions do not. Yup. But try as some of them do, you can't put hang a sign on a pig and expect everyone to call it a chicken just because the person who hung the sign does. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted February 7, 2020 #148 Share Posted February 7, 2020 5 minutes ago, Gromdor said: Yup. But try as some of them do, you can't put hang a sign on a pig and expect everyone to call it a chicken just because the person who hung the sign does. well right now the left sells a chicken and says it is a pig, but we are not that stupid to believe, we have eyes, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerBright19 Posted February 7, 2020 #149 Share Posted February 7, 2020 (edited) Too many millionnaires these days. Can't we set a financial cap on the rich and have all that surplus cash go back into the community? Perhaps the government could impose a federal law which states that anyone who possesses too many luxuries (cars, homes, TVs) will be charged with over extravagance. Better still, why not give the rich a legal responsibility to take care of the area they live in e.g. Like the Victorian aristocracy who used to look after the well-being of their land, family estate and community. Make the super rich legally and financially responsible for the well-being of impoverished communities. Edited February 7, 2020 by Aaron2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted February 8, 2020 #150 Share Posted February 8, 2020 1 hour ago, Aaron2016 said: Too many millionnaires these days. Can't we set a financial cap on the rich and have all that surplus cash go back into the community? Perhaps the government could impose a federal law which states that anyone who possesses too many luxuries (cars, homes, TVs) will be charged with over extravagance. Better still, why not give the rich a legal responsibility to take care of the area they live in e.g. Like the Victorian aristocracy who used to look after the well-being of their land, family estate and community. Make the super rich legally and financially responsible for the well-being of impoverished communities. Yes, let’s give the rich de facto fiefdoms, that won’t come back to bite everyone on the ****, no siree-Bob. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now