American Capitalism is not capitalism. It is a mix of socialism (half of peoples' income is stolen and redistributed by the state) and cronyism (political privilege is granted to some over others)

submitted by useless_aether from twitter.com

all 55 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]HeyImSancho 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

The US has all the -isms, and we sure as hell aren't free.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Another guy who doesn't understand what socialism is. There is nothing socialist about the US economy.

It is micro-communism and cronyism. The English language word "Socialism" is not what this guy implies. He is using orwellian newspeak for socialism.

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

Uh, it's the commies that said that the government taking over the means of production and their "massive redistribution" of wealth was simple "socialism" when they were trying to make their evil plans more palatable to the rest of the world. It's disinformation. Communist propaganda.

[–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (47 children)

Socialism is government control of the means of production. Sigh This crap just isn't going to stop, is it?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Socialism is a system with worker control over the means of production.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

That is marxism. Jesus, learn your terminology.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

It's a Marxist term.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Uh? What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying Karl Marx coined the term? I believe this is incorrect and the term was first used during the French revolution of 1789, long before Marx.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

History of socialism

The history of socialism has its origins in the 1789 French Revolution and the changes which it brought, although it has precedents in earlier movements and ideas. The Communist Manifesto was written by Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels in 1848 just before the Revolutions of 1848 swept Europe, expressing what they termed "scientific socialism". In the last third of the 19th century, social democratic parties arose in Europe, drawing mainly from Marxism.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Yes, I know the extremist Karl Marx got inspiration from Socialist ideas for his totalitarian and extremist doctrines. Do you have a point? Being "inspired by" to "invent a new thing" does not mean the new thing is the same as the thing he was "inspired by".

If you can't understand this, I don't know what to tell you. :-(

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Do you have a point? Being "inspired by" to "invent a new thing" does not mean the new thing is the same as the thing he was "inspired by".

It doesn't say, or imply this. You're making up excuses.

There's no point in wasting time discussing this with you any further.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

So there were revolutions that are said to have expressed "Scientific socialism" in the mid-1800s. OK. So what?

And then the article says "social democratic" parties arose drawing mainly from Marxism.

Therefore socialism and marxism are the same thing? Therefore it means socialism means the state has to own the means of production?

It doesn't say that either! And if it did, it would be wrong, quite simply. Let me provide some links that will make you see that your position is erroneous through no fault of your own.

The actual definition of the word "socialism" is known worldwide by many peoples in many languages, and in English by anyone who has received schooling in economics before the millenium.

This is the correct and accepted definition of socialism: https://philosophyterms.com/socialism/

However, many online dictionaries as well as shillypedia have started peddling the notion that it means "the state taking ownership of the means of economic production". Which, if you know anything, is totalitarian communism and not socialism at all. Right? OK let's continue...

Here's the shittypedia page with the false and wrong definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Randomly, the first site that popped up for me in my search engine, which happens to have the same wrong definition: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/socialism?s=t

But lastly and most importantly, a google auto-translation of the French Wikipedia page on socialism, into English: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffr.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSocialisme

Now it seems obvious to me that (((somebody))) is trying to change the accepted meaning of the term in order to further (((their))) agenda.

I believe the target of this psyop is the USA. Radicalizing US citizens against "socialism" by its false definition seems to be in (((their))) interest.

But either way it's a glaring example of widespread, and DEEP Orwellian disinformation TODAY.

Let's talk.

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

Bravo!

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

Nope. Because the workers are idiots. Can't let them control anything. See Trump, Brexit, and populism. Elites must make the right decisions for them.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Nope. Because the workers are idiots.

The public education system has ruined robbed the society of it's Independence.

Elites must make the right decisions for them.

That's why they created public education. To make you stupid and dependant.

Either way, socialism is worker control of the means of production. That's the literal definition.

It's actually an American concept. The public education system was created to rob is off our actual history, and replace it with nonsense.

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

The workers are the government and the government are the workers. Seriously, are you not familiar with your own system?

Except they're not actually equal, since workers are idiots. Hence elites have to take over and make the hard decisions. Government control, in the name of the workers.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

"Socialism" in orwellian newspeak means what you think it means, TOTALITARIAN COMMUNISM where the government takes over means of production. Except that's not actual English. To use the term "socialism" to describe an economic system is wrong. It is a philosophy of governance.

Socialism in the English language means "ANY regulation of capitalism that aims at reducing iniquity". Please note that INIQUITY is not at all the same thing as INEQUALITY.

Iniquity is where inequality is structurally encouraged to grow and be maximized. Iniquity is where, no matter how hard you work, how smart you are, how much education you get, you still don't get a fair shot at "making it" whereas a class of privileged individuals WILL make it no matter how dumb and lazy they might be. Just look at dubya's career as an example.

THIS: is why socialism is required: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/rich-free-money-capitalism-broken-ray-dalio-011750854.html

[–]Chipit 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

You realize that redefining words to suit your needs is what the villain did in Orwell's 1984?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

That is precisely what I am denouncing, yes. Do you have a point?

I am not doing it. It IS being done. I am denouncing it.

[–]Chipit 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

You redefined the word socialism to suit your interests. That's exactly what Ingsoc (meaning "English Socialism") does in 1984. They amputate and mutilate the language to serve their needs. 1984 was a dystopia. It was meant to serve as a warning, you're not supposed to copy it!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Dude. I am warning people that the Wikipedia definition of the word IS newspeak. It is false. I'm not changing anything, I'm speaking of the TRUE meaning of the word, not this invented orwellian crap.

You got this thing completely reversed. You got 1984'ed.

[–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Just because Wikipedia says something doesn't make it false. It IS the definition of socialism. When you have your own carefully tailored definition that nobody else uses...you think maybe you're in the wrong here?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

So the actual definition of the word "socialism" is known worldwide by many peoples in many languages, and in English by anyone who has received schooling in economics before the millenium.

This is the correct and accepted definition of socialism: https://philosophyterms.com/socialism/

However, many online dictionaries as well as shillypedia have started peddling the notion that it means "the state taking ownership of the means of economic production". Which, if you know anything, is totalitarian communism and not socialism at all. Right? OK let's continue...

Here's the shittypedia page with the false and wrong definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Randomly, the first site that popped up for me in my search engine, which happens to have the same wrong definition: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/socialism?s=t

But lastly and most importantly, a google auto-translation of the French Wikipedia page on socialism, into English: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffr.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSocialisme

Now it seems obvious to me that (((somebody))) is trying to change the accepted meaning of the term in order to further (((their))) agenda.

I believe the target of this psyop is the USA. Radicalizing US citizens against "socialism" by its false definition seems to be in (((their))) interest.

But either way it's a glaring example of widespread, and DEEP Orwellian disinformation TODAY.

Let's talk.

[–]black_hole_son 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Cool story bro. Must be nice to make up your own facts.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What do you mean. This is 100% factual. Did you even bother to read. :-(

I know it's a hard pill to swallow when you've been lied to about something as fundamental as language. But you're better off knowing than being ignorant of it, don't you think?

[–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I've had this "that's not real socialism!" argument so many times I can't even

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

Dude. The communists. THEY are the ones saying "we are the REAL socialists" and you believe them. COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA. Are you proud of it? Being fooled by commies?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Socialism is basically "a set of regulations in a capitalist economy to prevent its excesses" such as billionaires getting ever richer off the backs of ordinary workers.

It goes COUNTER to wealth redistribution and it NEEDS a capitalist economy to even EXIST.

Can your tiny mind process even such basic information well enough to realize that socialism is almost perfectly opposed to communism?

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Are you sure?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Yes! That's the false definition! Even wikipedia in every other language has the right definition. Use google translate and look at the page as it is written in any other language! I looked at the French one and it has the correct one. You will see that they are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!!!

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Really? I've never heard this before.

Let's see a link, so others can weigh in.

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

Easy, thanks for making a reasonable and well thought-out inquiry about this instead of calling me a communist, which I DEFINITELY am not!

So the actual definition of the word "socialism" is known worldwide by many peoples in many languages, and in English by anyone who has received schooling in economics before the millenium.

This is the correct and accepted definition of socialism: https://philosophyterms.com/socialism/

However, many online dictionaries as well as shillypedia have started peddling the notion that it means "the state taking ownership of the means of economic production". Which, if you know anything, is totalitarian communism and not socialism at all. Right? OK let's continue...

Here's the shittypedia page with the false and wrong definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Randomly, the first site that popped up for me in my search engine, which happens to have the same wrong definition: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/socialism?s=t

But lastly and most importantly, a google auto-translation of the French Wikipedia page on socialism, into English: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffr.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSocialisme

This again has the correct definition, the same, but using different wording, as found on philosophyterms.com

Now it seems obvious to me that (((somebody))) is trying to change the accepted meaning of the term in order to further (((their))) agenda.

I believe the target of this psyop is the USA. Radicalizing US citizens against "socialism" by its false definition seems to be in (((their))) interest.

But either way it's a glaring example of widespread, and DEEP Orwellian disinformation TODAY.

Thank you for your time.

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

Do you think if you copy/paste your bullshit enough times it becomes right?

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

Just trying to inform people about this evil orwellian horror!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That definition comes STRAIGHT from communist propaganda. Are you or have you ever been a communist? Because you sure as heck sound like one!

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

STFU socialist.

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

I am certainly a socialist. A national socialist. And infinitely opposed to communism, marxism and the state owning the means of production.

Does that clarify my position for you, newspeak sheeple and Communism-brainwashed?

[–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You sure have a way with people.

Do you often convince people to your side with abuse like that?

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

It's not "a side".

It's a thing called REALITY and it's not "mine." It just IS without asking anyone if they agree with it or not.

Wait, were you saying "STFU Socialist" in humor? If so, I apologize, but I must admit there has not been much humor for me to laugh at on this site... :-/

[–]useless_aether[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

translated from an eastern block lexicon (published in the early '60s):

socialism is a socioeconomic formation, based on social ownership of the means of production, that's exploitation-free, and is the precursor to communism. capitalism must be present for socialism to occur.

and then it goes on for pages...

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yes! That's COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA! Exactly!

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

yeah, communism was created not to free, but to subdue the masses. ergo its all just a bunch of lies designed to take everything away from the people.

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

That's not my point. My point is that the COMMUNISTS have taken to calling their horrible ideas "Socialism" because Socialism has always been a respectable philosophy of governance. They have created this bit of orwellian newspeak in order to make their doctrine seem more acceptable.

But nowadays many Americans are buying this communist propaganda that socialism is the same as communism, while in fact they are almost opposites. Case in point, the national socialists and their hatred and rejection of everything marxist and communist.

As a result of this, the idea that there is a philosophy of governance founded on the idea of attempting to minimize inequality of opportunity (iniquity) becomes absent the language and therefore the thinking of a big slice of the population.

It is truly orwellian.

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

thanks for clearing it up!