Socialism in Action

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

Which means that capitalism would not survive without the state. Without this “padding” against the sharp corners of the market, the people would rebel, as frequently happened before their institution.
[/quote]

LMAO - wow - I’ve never seen such tortured logic in my life - a discussion about how socialism was causing the financial troubles in Europe ends as a condemnation of capitalism not being able to survive without the state (ie socialism) when it is the disease of socialism that is killing capitalism and the state along with it . . .you . . you’re good you . . .LMAO

want to try an actual logical argument?

62

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

These juvenile fantasies you invent do not comport in the least to reality.
[/quote]
HA!

Ryan, your a man in constant conflict. You have A, but you want B. You strive for B, you jerk off to B. Problem is your never going to get it… because you want it. This striving… this wanting more…this very nature that is making you chase the socialism utopian is why your ideal would fail. Desire works for capitalism (however, it can get ugly) - It won’t , however, work for socialism. What works for socialism is Awareness… is living in the moment… with no thoughts of this “More” attitude. No striving for power, money, sex… Just observing mankind and becoming aware of your nature. Once in awareness, this ideal of socialism would drop. And naturally, your love and passions would transform you without you ever attempting to attain anything. Socialism would work. … but you wouldnt think of it as socialism. You wouldnt be talking it up to the rest of the world. It would be loving, peaceful… and all people would be equal.

Problem is, however: Awareness is hard. Our programming gets the best of us at times. So eventually this utopian would fall because of thoughts… because of greed… because of wanting more.

So Ryan, with that said, have you thought about becoming a monk?

63

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

Which means that capitalism would not survive without the state. Without this “padding” against the sharp corners of the market, the people would rebel, as frequently happened before their institution.
[/quote]

LMAO - wow - I’ve never seen such tortured logic in my life - a discussion about how socialism was causing the financial troubles in Europe ends as a condemnation of capitalism not being able to survive without the state (ie socialism) when it is the disease of socialism that is killing capitalism and the state along with it . . .you . . you’re good you . . .LMAO

want to try an actual logical argument?[/quote]

The only tortured logic is yours, desperately trying to fault socialism for a situation with which it had nothing to do. According to you, when the Soviet Union failed, it was a failure of socialism. Europe’s present crisis is likewise a failure of socialism. Moreover, the precipitous crash of the American economy is also a failure of socialism. Why don’t you take the next logical step and blame socialism for cancer, obesity, and climate change, as well?

Either point out the countries in which the means of production are communally owned and operated on a planned basis (for this is the definition of socialism, which you already knew, unless you were simply talking out of your ass), or admit the obvious, that you are a clueless buffoon.

64

[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

These juvenile fantasies you invent do not comport in the least to reality.
[/quote]
HA!

Ryan, your a man in constant conflict. You have A, but you want B. You strive for B, you jerk off to B. Problem is your never going to get it… because you want it. This striving… this wanting more…this very nature that is making you chase the socialism utopian is why your ideal would fail. Desire works for capitalism (however, it can get ugly) - It won’t , however, work for socialism. What works for socialism is Awareness… is living in the moment… with no thoughts of this “More” attitude. No striving for power, money, sex… Just observing mankind and becoming aware of your nature. Once in awareness, this ideal of socialism would drop. And naturally, your love and passions would transform you without you ever attempting to attain anything. Socialism would work. … but you wouldnt think of it as socialism. You wouldnt be talking it up to the rest of the world. It would be loving, peaceful… and all people would be equal.

Problem is, however: Awareness is hard. Our programming gets the best of us at times. So eventually this utopian would fall becomes of Thoughts… because of greed… of wanting more.

So Ryan, with that said, have you thought about becoming a monk? [/quote]

Do you actually plan to say something, or may I go?

65

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

Do you actually plan to say something, or may I go?
[/quote]

Thats the response I figured I would get.

The truth is right in front of your eyes… Now all you have to do is open them.

66

Ah yes. Go capitalism!

Better? Are my eyes open now?

67

You hold the psychology of mankind.

How bout you learn about yourself?

68

[quote]THE_CLAMP_DOWN wrote:
You hold the psychology of mankind.

How bout you learn about yourself?[/quote]

No.

He just ist.

Now if everyone else would just understand that and just listen to him…

69

Orion is right. We should listen to him instead. He doesn’t even have to know anything about a subject to know that it is wrong. Blind faith in orion! Think comfortable thoughts!

70

What is there to listen to? A socialist utopian has never happened on this planet. Why? Because humans can not live in a society where everything belongs to everyone. We always compare ourselves to the person next to us. We covet on a regular basis. Whether it is money, posessions, or women.

We want what the other guy has reguardless of how hard he worked for it. I like the fact that Ryan being in school looks at people as being good, but we are not. We are all inherintly evil or sinful if that takes a bit of harshness off of it.

71

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Orion is right. We should listen to him instead. He doesn’t even have to know anything about a subject to know that it is wrong. Blind faith in orion! Think comfortable thoughts![/quote]

Well yes, blind faith to me, yay!

So, this is my sermon:

YOU, are responsible for your own life.

YOU, have the responsibility to make up your own mind.

YOU, own the fruits of your labor.

YOU, have to understand that life, the universe and everything does not owe you shit, and that 42 is not much of an answer, so man up and put your shoulder to the wheel.

Whereas the gospel of Ryan is what exactly?

72

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

The only tortured logic is yours, desperately trying to fault socialism for a situation with which it had nothing to do. According to you, when the Soviet Union failed, it was a failure of socialism. Europe’s present crisis is likewise a failure of socialism.

Moreover, the precipitous crash of the American economy is also a failure of socialism. Why don’t you take the next logical step and blame socialism for cancer, obesity, and climate change, as well?

Either point out the countries in which the means of production are communally owned and operated on a planned basis (for this is the definition of socialism, which you already knew, unless you were simply talking out of your ass), or admit the obvious, that you are a clueless buffoon.
[/quote]

If you think the next logical step from pointing out the faults of government regulation of private enterprise is to blame government regulation cancer (genetically and environmentally caused) obesity (again genetics and lifestyle) and climate change (a magical fairyland theory) - it’s no wonder you can’t create a logicla argument . . . .

want to try semantic gymnastics with me? let’s go . . .

countries in which the means of production are communally owned and operated on a planned basis - Republic of Cuba, People’s Republic of China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Lao People’s Democratic Republic and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

You, on the other hand - need to be much more specific about your terms instead of hiding in the vagueries of your ideology. Socialism can be described in economic theory either as a Planned Economy or a Government Directed/Regulated Ecoonomy - if it is a planned economy, it can either be a Centralized planned economy or De-centralized planned economy. In addition, there is another alternative through Market Socialism.

By using those basic variations, we could include a large portion of Africa, southern Asia and a number of ME states just for starters

But any economic theory has to be predicated upon the underlying Socialist political theory and there is not enough space for a breakdown of all of the variations, mis-mash and repackaged versions of that nonsense.

But, since you’re such an expert, you already knew this . . .

73

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

But the new owners are never more careful.
[/quote]

Here’s the hole in your logic Ryan. The new owners of successful companies (read CEO’s and presidents) are careful and good at their jobs. You don’t hear about them in the catastrophic media because they’re a non-story. There are plenty of companies that I can site an example of.

There are, however, CEO’s and Presidents of companies that run it into the ground (as we’ve all seen). You’re arguing in absolutes when an absolute doesn’t exist.

74

That pretty words do not constitute a successful economic system, and that wishing really hard won’t change reality.

The individual must be free to develop as he sees fit. He must not be constrained by any excessive action of the state, nor even by the forces of the market. His labor belongs to him, and not someone who is fortunate enough to be in a position to skim some off the top.

That society must be free to control as they please those things produced and made valuable by society, and which affect society.

That freedom for all cannot be achieved by giving wealth and power to a few, a concept you are unable to understand.

75

RPM, you are a typical dime a dozen fantasy tormented commie. You can point to no significant examples of the success of your ideology while the world is still stinking with it’s 20th century corpses, both actual and political and yet you proclaim it’s superiority with a wholly irrational religious fervor. All this while actually living in a country whose very history is a blaring refutation of practically every syllable you type.

You’re a living breathing classroom postulation without a particle of consciousness in pragmatic reality. So once again here is where you demand that I respond to one of your insipid substanceless posts and prove to you the Earth is round. What’s really sad is how many multitudes of clones just like you have gone before… in this country. This is nuthin new.

76

[quote]polo77j wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

But the new owners are never more careful.
[/quote]

Here’s the hole in your logic Ryan. The new owners of successful companies (read CEO’s and presidents) are careful and good at their jobs. You don’t hear about them in the catastrophic media because they’re a non-story. There are plenty of companies that I can site an example of.

There are, however, CEO’s and Presidents of companies that run it into the ground (as we’ve all seen). You’re arguing in absolutes when an absolute doesn’t exist. [/quote]

Well it’s a good thing to know that there were some responsible executives beside those that torpedoed the economy.

77

Ever notice how all of the socialist nations call themselves democratic republics - lol - as if!

78

But government regulation is not socialism, not even close. This is why your argument is completely irrational.

Ha, the only one of those in which industry in collectively owned and run according to plan is Cuba. China, haha. Let me give you a hint: if you can buy stock in a company in that country, they’re probably not socialist.

In addition, none of these countries are in Europe, which is strange, seeing as how you were convinced that practically all European countries are socialist.

I am being specific, you moron. That’s why I specifically said “collectively owned” (not government owned), planned economy. This would eliminate market socialism.

If you want to seriously claim that any country in Europe is socialist, then apparently I also have enough leeway to discount any country you name as socialist. It goes both ways.

[quote]But any economic theory has to be predicated upon the underlying Socialist political theory and there is not enough space for a breakdown of all of the variations, mis-mash and repackaged versions of that nonsense.

But, since you’re such an expert, you already knew this . . .[/quote]

All I have to say is, have fun solving capitalism’s problems with more capitalism. It’s worked so well so far.

79

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

That pretty words do not constitute a successful economic system, and that wishing really hard won’t change reality.

The individual must be free to develop as he sees fit. He must not be constrained by any excessive action of the state, nor even by the forces of the market. His labor belongs to him, and not someone who is fortunate enough to be in a position to skim some off the top.

That society must be free to control as they please those things produced and made valuable by society, and which affect society.

That freedom for all cannot be achieved by giving wealth and power to a few, a concept you are unable to understand.[/quote]

The individual MUST be restricted by the force of the market, because the scarcity of goods is a reality.

You might as well try to ignore gravity.

80

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
RPM, you are a typical dime a dozen fantasy tormented commie.[/quote]

A strange criticism coming from someone who has yet to point out any factual error of mine.

Again, it seems to me that you are much more religious, when all of your assertions come without any support of any kind. When you contradict yourself at every turn, yet still claim to be correct. Such as the sudden compassion for the deceased, when the system you adore has only been propped up on millions of bodies. You don’t seem to care about them.

This country’s history is almost an ideal vindication of Marx’s theories. Meanwhile, you mischaracterize or simply get wrong much of the history you claim to be proud of. Perhaps it’s not surprising that a man who cannot utter two sentences which do not contradict each should support a country built on so many hypocrisies.

Self-government! Except for women, non-whites, immigrants, and those who own no property. Liberty! Except for the slaves and the workers. Independence! Except for the countries which we would prefer to subjugate.

When your vision of reality is so utterly distorted by a slavish devotion to ideology, a clear vision must seem a strange sight, indeed. Come out of the cave.