Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
If you are talking about the social ownership of the means of production: No country on earth achieve that. It doesn't mean that it is "shit". There are reasons behind the fact that this never happened.
It looks like you are attributing a value on a system based on the fact that either it never existed or the fact that it was never implemented correctly. From my point of view it would be similar to someone saying that a table is shit because the one building it never followed the instructions and build it completely upside down..
Do you understand what I mean here?
It looks like you are attributing a value on a system based on the fact that either it never existed or the fact that it was never implemented correctly. From my point of view it would be similar to someone saying that a table is shit because the one building it never followed the instructions and build it completely upside down..
Do you understand what I mean here?
So many examples that has at least one, or a combination of, a dictator, internal power struggles, famine, civil wars, great political and economic instability caused by forcible changes in leadership, suffering from loss of resources due to aforementioned things etc.
How is it so hard to understand that dictatorships ≠ socialist policy? How do you all keep conflating socialist governments with socialist policy in non socialist societies?
How is it so hard to understand that dictatorships ≠ socialist policy? How do you all keep conflating socialist governments with socialist policy in non socialist societies?
Kind of a random question (and I may have asked it before) but has anyone noticed a bit of an uptick in racism towards Indians online recently?
I'm not sure if I just never really noticed it before or not but I see a ton of people just completely shitting on Indians on sites like Twitter, Tiktok, Youtube, etc.
Not sure what's causing this though.
I'm not sure if I just never really noticed it before or not but I see a ton of people just completely shitting on Indians on sites like Twitter, Tiktok, Youtube, etc.
Not sure what's causing this though.
No, for you the biggest problem is you don't understand the causality of events around socialism.
First of all, dictatorship, instability, and everything you named as "separate" factors rather than as recurring outcomes of socialist policy when applied at scale to achieve a socialist state:
abolishing private ownership and centralizing economic decisions necessarily concentrates power
and requires enforcement of THAT, which repeatedly leads to authoritarian rule across very different historical contexts.
Forcible changes in leadership are a predictable result of how socialist systems concentrate power. So proof showed us exactly what it leads to. To ignore that is silly.
First of all, dictatorship, instability, and everything you named as "separate" factors rather than as recurring outcomes of socialist policy when applied at scale to achieve a socialist state:
abolishing private ownership and centralizing economic decisions necessarily concentrates power
and requires enforcement of THAT, which repeatedly leads to authoritarian rule across very different historical contexts.
Forcible changes in leadership are a predictable result of how socialist systems concentrate power. So proof showed us exactly what it leads to. To ignore that is silly.
I swear it's like some people can't comprehend that there are various types of socialism, one of which that allows free enterprise as contractory as it is. There are Democratic socialist economies.
There has never been a true communist society for example, as every method to bring about communism included using dictatorships to transition by force and failed. There has never been a society that is moneyless, stateless, or classless. It is in a way disingenuous to say communism has never worked, because there never once was an actual communist society in the first place. It is up in the air if communism can ever work(no I dont support communism and personally think it sucks).
ONCE AGAIN, using failed dictatorships to say socialism in any and all forms is bad, is very misguided.
I'll repeat to you what I said to Roo "What is your point? You are screaming stuff at me that I never denied."
I myself have many posts saying how easy it is for a dictatorship to emerge in socialist or communist movements because they forcibly overthrow a government and society, consolidate power, and push changes via a dictatorship. By creating so much instability, their only option is to be authoritarian. If they are to impose such a radical change to economic policy and social life, they have to do it by force. Never denied it, never the point.
I swear it's like some people can't comprehend that there are various types of socialism, one of which that allows free enterprise as contractory as it is. There are Democratic socialist economies.
There has never been a true communist society for example, as every method to bring about communism included using dictatorships to transition by force and failed. There has never been a society that is moneyless, stateless, or classless. It is in a way disingenuous to say communism has never worked, because there never once was an actual communist society in the first place. It is up in the air if communism can ever work(no I dont support communism and personally think it sucks).
ONCE AGAIN, using failed dictatorships to say socialism in any and all forms is bad, is very misguided.
I'll repeat to you what I said to Roo "What is your point? You are screaming stuff at me that I never denied."
I myself have many posts saying how easy it is for a dictatorship to emerge in socialist or communist movements because they forcibly overthrow a government and society, consolidate power, and push changes via a dictatorship. By creating so much instability, their only option is to be authoritarian. If they are to impose such a radical change to economic policy and social life, they have to do it by force. Never denied it, never the point.
What you’re basically saying is, let’s ignore the twenty times it failed and try again? Lol, forced redistribution has consistently been shown not to work.
Socialism as an economic system fails in practice. You can debate for the merits of a mixed economy (I think these are the things you're conflating... Like nonsensical democratic socialism which is again practiced capitalism), but defending real socialism ignores the historical record.
As for the methods... Socialism has to be forced, it can’t impose itself naturally, and that’s exactly where the problems begin.
It’s hard for me to take the Minnesota daycare fraud thing seriously when it’s very clearly being weaponized by the most violently racist people on the planet.
These folks very clearly just want to deport people for being black and Muslim. They’re not even really hiding it. Absolutely no reason to engage with these folks as if they’re acting in good faith.
These folks very clearly just want to deport people for being black and Muslim. They’re not even really hiding it. Absolutely no reason to engage with these folks as if they’re acting in good faith.
Never once said nor implied that we should try again. Who do you guys assume so much even I say the opposite?
Yes....like me calling Democratic socialism baby capitalism....or that saying China has heavily regulated capitalism....
Did I advocate for a socialist economy? I don't believe I ever did. I've said numerous times that capitalism works if it is regulated appropriately.
With the current circumstances being global capitalism, you cannot impose anything socialist without force.
Yes....like me calling Democratic socialism baby capitalism....or that saying China has heavily regulated capitalism....
Did I advocate for a socialist economy? I don't believe I ever did. I've said numerous times that capitalism works if it is regulated appropriately.
With the current circumstances being global capitalism, you cannot impose anything socialist without force.
As for @Logiko, send me the number of your drug dealer 
How would you try to protect yourself and your coworker around if you can't quit?
You're the one arguing it's never been tried, it has been, repeatedly.
You can't impose real socialism in any circumstances without force. That is the whole point. Good.
Okay then we agree that it should crash and burn
You can't impose real socialism in any circumstances without force. That is the whole point. Good.
Okay then we agree that it should crash and burn
It is as if some of you only view socialism through government control when I say "any and all forms."
You cannot impose anything without force. Socialism as a standalone system itself doesn't require force. The circumstances however for the past like 120 years(hard stuck capitalist society) made it so that Socialism cannot being implemented without force. So it doesnt matter how nice it sounds or effective it could be if millions have to die for the high likelihood of failure. This makes a socialist government or society a dangerous, outdated feature.
Nah I aint wrong. Communism and socialism are almost always attempted after forcibly taking over a government, resulting in social and economic instability along with the consolidation of power, resulting in a dictatorship in an attempt to restore order. Dictatorships are doomed to fail sooner or later.
Of course there is no standalone system because there are no current or recent circumstances to allow such a thing to exist. I'm saying if there was a socialist society without the usage of force or radical change(think if it was normal like capitalism), there would be no dictatorships growing like weeds. If socialism was the norm, then people will say capitalism always requires a dictatorship due to circumstance. Capitalism failing is what led to Fascism, but Capitalism doesn't lead to fascism by default; it requires certain circumstances.
Of course there is no standalone system because there are no current or recent circumstances to allow such a thing to exist. I'm saying if there was a socialist society without the usage of force or radical change(think if it was normal like capitalism), there would be no dictatorships growing like weeds. If socialism was the norm, then people will say capitalism always requires a dictatorship due to circumstance. Capitalism failing is what led to Fascism, but Capitalism doesn't lead to fascism by default; it requires certain circumstances.
so you're repeating what I said
I mean I agree, it could never work.