The Evils of Socialism

submitted by EndlessSunflowers from (i.imgur.com)

all 18 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]EndlessSunflowers[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

A lot of people don't even know what they think anymore
is money the root of all evil, or is it the most important thing
is helping your fellow human noble, or are corporations priority?

We deserve what we get.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

If only Americans understood the meaning of the word "socialism". But no, that very important concept has been the object of a vast psy op to brainwash Americans with the COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA definition of the term. It's very well done too, since it prevents them from thinking the full spectrum of socioeconomic thought, and thus ENSURES that their nation DRIFTS UNERRINGLY into TOTALITARIAN COMMUNISM.

And said Americans always try to shut me up when I denounce this. Why are they so hell-bent on becoming a totalitarian communist nation? I don't get it.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

On this matter you are VERY correct.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

I am very correct on more matters than even you can recognize. But since nobody wants to hear about it, I STFU.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

You need to find humility as well as learn about science, not spelled with a p.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I have more of both than you can even imagine. But whatever dude. You think the process of doing science means the same thing as the nature of science, which makes it impossible to have any conversation with you on the topic.

I told you, one cannot discuss how the scientific process applies within a particular discipline with a lay person who does not understand the basic principles of said discipline. However, one can discuss the NATURE of a discipline as science. I have been ready and willing to do the second, until you conflated with the first and made a big whole lot of diarrhea of the whole conversation. THAT is how things don't move forward. In that regard, you get an A.

But I get it you have the imaginary status of your position to "defend" and as such, sacrificing a discussion here and there to the hubris of your imaginary superiority is worth it. I understand perfectly well, most people operate on such a basis.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Sheer fucking hubris.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I have an idea: If every definition you are arguing here about is so biased and misused, why don't we just find a new one ?

Mathematicians do this magic trick since the word mathematician exists, i believe.

They do it so long until they finally can derive something useful from this definition that fits also in the rest of their system. Sometimes they get even something actually apply-able out of this. :-)

Proving things is actually very easy once somebody found the right (i'd rather call creative enough OR abstract enough) definition.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Go for it.

I respect math but can't tame her.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's definitely a her. I'm quite sure of that bc. she is so beautiful and such a fkn bitch at the same time.

Even after years of a serious relationship with her (almost a marriage) i still most times can't get what actually is in her head.

[–]DffrntDrmmr 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Republicans aren't giving socialism to the rich. Otherwise, the rich would not be rich.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

What do you call the socialist bailouts then? Socialism ALWAYS saves Capitalism when its excesses ultimately fail and collapse - without exception, EVERY TIME.

[–]DffrntDrmmr 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Welfare for the wealthy?

Some people around here use the term "socialism" too broadly. It's a term describing a socio-economic system (one where the government primarily owns the means of production).

"Socialism" does not mean "social," "society" (though they're derived from the same root word) or "welfare."

Please try to evolve your grasp of the word. Improper usage of it makes communication difficult.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

What do you call welfare for the poor?

Who runs the government and the corporations? The corporatocracy ruling class, same shit for capitalists and communists, just different titles.

You seem to be among the minority that is trying to redefine what has been established for decades and centuries.

If you like, we can settle this in our public forum. You won't like the results.

[–]DffrntDrmmr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What do you call welfare for the poor?

Welfare?

You seem to be among the minority that is trying to redefine what has been established for decades and centuries.

You're so fucking clueless.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Feel free to weigh in:
/s/AskSaidIt/comments/3y8v/saiditors_ive_debated_what_science_means_with_one/

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He's a lot more right than you are.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Your grasp of the word is pure Orwellian Newspeak communist propaganda though. You master that aspect very well, it seems.