"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." -Winston Churchill

submitted by sproketboy from self.quotes

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]horatioherbert 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Socialism in the economy is flawed because it assumes the the person who currently operates the forklift can also run the company successfully . People are not the same

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

But that's not socialism, that's COMMUNISM. You are confused. And it's not surprising, given the century-long PsyOp to change the meaning of the word socialism in order to brainwash people into conflating socialism with communism.

Literally, the first expression of any kind of relationship between socialism and communism was Karl Marx, a communist. Your definition of socialism is COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA. Before Marx, the leading socialists were anarchists and libertarians. How much more opposed to communism can anybody be, than anarchists and libertarians? It's pretty much the other end of the spectrum.

And yet, here we are, with a big part of the English-speaking population subject to a language-operated lobotomy preventing them from thinking the full spectrum of socioeconomic thought.

I. Definition Socialism is an economic philosophy based on the need for regulations on capitalism. Unchecked capitalism, most economists agree, can create serious problems in the long term, since short-term personal profit does not motivate companies to take care of infrastructure, the environment, or their workers. Socialists emphasize this fact and argue that only the government can solve the problems created by capitalism. Other economic philosophies generally acknowledge the problem, but advocate other solutions to it, while only a few extremists deny that there is any problem with absolute capitalism.

Although many people think that socialism and capitalism are completely incompatible systems, the fact is that most developed nations operate on a combination of both. For example, nearly every major city in the developed world has some system of government-run public transportation, such as bus lines or a subway. There are also laws against child labor, unsafe workplaces, and reckless pollution, and government programs that help provide education, food, and healthcare to the poor. All of these are socialist ideas that exist in relative harmony with capitalist economies. Capitalism vs. socialism is a question of balance, not an “either/or” question.

Source

[–]horatioherbert 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Good government can indeed curtail abuses of people by other people but you assume members of government are good, not corrupt and sordid who will do the same as ‘unchecked capitalism.’ Now you a socialist answer this: how is the price of rice determined in a Socialist economy? Some government stooge sitting in an office who knows nothing of rice

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

There is no such thing as a "socialist economy". Where the hell are you getting these delirious ideas? As I wrote above, in the world we have CAPITALIST and we have COMMUNIST economies. Personally, I can't see anything even remotely good about the communist system, so it is fair to say I am very pro-capitalism. I am also very pro-socialism. They aren't mutually exclusive, THEY WORK HAND IN HAND.

If you know nothing about a topic, please don't pick arguments with people who know everything about the topic. It gets REALLY BORING REALLY QUICKLY.

On to the matter of government: Americans are brainwashed to think their crony oligarchy is the very definition of true democracy. It is of course more delirium. True democracy was in Lybia before its "liberation" by the murderers in the US military machine. True democracy still exists in Switzerland.

Search on saidit for "direct democracy" and "switzerland" and you'll find videos explaining how the Swiss people keep their politicians on very short leashes, how said politicians, or rather PUBLIC SERVANTS which is what they should be, are HELD ACCOUNTABLE for what happens on their watch, and how THE PEOPLE can vote in or revoke any proposed or existing bill / law / regulation / executive order / decree / whatever else put out by governments.

[–]horatioherbert 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Surprise! There are more than two types of economies that exist in the world you ignorant socialist. Continue your watch from your room with the windows closed and shades drawn. You are so lost you cannot even comment or reply to direct questions only continue this drivel. You just want to pick and choose what you like without benefit of discussion or debate about evidence and facts. If "There is no such thing as a 'socialist economy' what are you carrying on about? What can be accurately described as Socialist? If not an economy then what?

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

Socialism is a philosophy of governance regarding matters of economics. Yes, socialism has economic effects. And yes, I am aware of other systems, I posted about this myself BEFORE that message you are replying to. But CURRENTLY in the world there are only communist and capitalist economies. That's what I wrote, and that's what I stand by. In major countries anyway - Maybe the natives of Bali have a different system, or some tribe in Africa. But those aren't NATIONAL ECONOMIC SYSTEMS.

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

It is admirable for a nation to take care of its poor citizens and less well off and economically disadvantaged in the form of training, education and other types of support. Do you assume the basic nature of people is cooperative? I think this is false and people are better motivated through independence and responsibility which will lead to some measure of success.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Who's assuming what though? In Norway, welfare earns about 70% of a normal wage, and traditionally the nation is characterized by a low level of unemployment. Also, their prisons resemble budget hotels, focused on training, social integration and education.

Their highly socialist nation has been a tremendous success. Until it became ethnically heterogeneous. For a society to function, people must play the same "game" (life, priorities, social interactions, etc.) by the same "rules" (morality, tradition, etc.). When Norwegians got invaded by terrorist Muslim savages disguised as "refugees", the whole thing stopped working. This is not a failure of socialism, it's a failure of multiculturalism.

Most of the top countries to live in are highly socialist, no matter which list you look at:

https://afroscandic.com/best-country-to-live-in-2015/

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-countries-to-live-in-2015-12

https://247wallst.com/special-report/2015/12/21/most-livable-countries/6/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2015/07/15/the-worlds-most-reputable-countries-2015/#77eb363d6cac

To answer your last question more directly, let me counter your "responsiblity" with "elevated ideals": While it is technically true that FORCING people to TOIL to be able to SURVIVE works, people much prefer to AIM HIGHER than simple SURVIVAL and actually THRIVE and ACCOMPLISH THEMSELVES in whatever they are BEST SUITED at. This is a natural drive of white people. I'm not saying it's not true of other ethnic groups as well, however. I know white people because I am white myself, living in a predominantly white country and if you will look at that list above, THE TOP COUNTRIES ARE ALL WHITE NATIONS. However, Lybia was on a trajectory that would have put it on that list in a few decades, had it not gotten "liberated".

Turning a country into a slave camp will "get people to work", true. However, the best solution, at least for whites, is to GUARANTEE their basic needs such as food, clothes, housing, healthcare, education and professional training. Because people (the white ones anyway) are more driven by the idea of LIVING A GOOD LIFE than simple survival. As such, as the Norwegian model indicates, people don't stay unemployed for long because they want to CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIETY and FEEL USEFUL. It is part of the social contract of the ethnically homogeneous version of their country.

Coercion towards a misguided idea of "responsiblity" doesn't enter into that equation. It is a much lower, needlessly brutal approach to society and national economics. But sure, in the USA it's the ideology that people are brainwashed with, since it plays to the needs of the super rich. They want and need their wageslaves without taking any responsibility for a system that enriches them immensely while moving ever closer to actual slavery.

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

USA is not a slave camp do not equate the nation with Soviet slave camps there is no such thing. It's quite revealing of your intellect to think this could be true. US citizens are "wage slaves" because it is a capitalist country and goods and services are paid with money, so guess what? You need to earn money. Only few are handed immense amounts of it at birth and this should be addressed to guard against dynasties that do nothing but suck up power and resources. Individual responsibility came out of the Enlightenment so it is not brutal, it is very liberating. I am responsible for me and my family, you have that same responsibility if you so choose. Most citizens of the world cannot appreciate 'elevated ideals' since the Enlightenment never reached these poor souls.

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

guard against dynasties that do nothing but suck up power and resources

That is literally the definition of socialism. You've been brainwashed with an Orwellian Newspeak, communist propaganda false definition of the term.

I have said nothing bad about responsibility. Responsibility is fine, when it is actual and right. But you side with oppression and call it responsibility, while arguing against parasites. So overall you are being of ill faith. You're making it obvious. We have stopped discussing the topic and started having you trying to justify your beliefs instead of seeking truth.

And yes the USA is a massive slave camp. The chains are inside the mind, not at the ankle.