ALIENated's tags:

The page you were looking for no longer exists

socialism

An economic system in which the production and distribution of goods are controlled substantially by the government rather than by private enterprise, and in which cooperation rather than competition guides economic activity. There are many varieties of socialism. Some socialists tolerate capitalism, as long as the government maintains the dominant influence over the economy; others insist on an abolition of private enterprise. All communists are socialists, but not all socialists are communists.

That pretty well defines it. To me it means big government. The government telling everyone what to do and squashing free enterprise and competition. Government should be like a referee in a ball game, not the only player on the field. Socialism puts the state first and the individual last.

OhBummer is probably using the Marxist theory in which socialism is the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

That would explain why he is rushing through all this new legislation, not even reading most of it because he does not care what it says as long as it expands the role of government, moving us toward a Big Brother state. Once government has enough control then no one will be able to do anything about the adjustments necessary to complete the transition to communism.

Borax thinks government should be able to redistribute wealth, but any moron knows that you create wealth, you do not redistribute it. Even China is learning that capitalism is a good thing, but they are persuing it without individual freedom.

It amazes me that Democrats can blither about liberty and freedom and then elect someone like OhBummer who is dead set on taking away our liberties and our freedom in order to put the state in control of everything. I do not think he is necessarily a bad man (like a Hitler or Stalin) yet. Those men started out to impose state dictated values for good reasons as well. The problem comes when you have to deal with those who do not want to go along with all that.



del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • SeanRenaud said on Jul 31, 2009....

    So by your own definition Obama/The Government owning GM should be okay.  They aren't the only player on the field.  I seem to recall Ford, Nissan, Honda and Volkswagon out there.  So even if the US government own A company it would still be ruled forced to compete and would not be the only player on the field.  I suppose you could make a debate that the rules would be skewed in it's favor but hell half the reason the US car industry is so fucked is because they've ignored the rules for the last twenty years anyway.

    I'm not seeing how anything in your defintion of socialism requires the entirety of the public to participate though.  So I'm still even after giving you time to clarify I'm not hearing how the police force and military aren't socialist.

  • ALIENated said on Jul 31, 2009....

    To me, the police and the military are just the police and the military. Basically they are both law enforcement agencies like the FBI and the CIA. They protect and serve the people much like highway and bridge builders serve the people. They are simply doing a job or providing a service. The first paragraph of the U.S. Constitution mentions "provide for the common defence" and goes on to lay out how to do that. I am not sure why you are so hung up on the military being socialistic, but even if it is that does not make socialism, in general, a good thing. The military and most law enforcement agencies operate as a hierarchy where persons of a certain rank give orders to persons of lower rank. I really do not see that as socialism. People serve in the military, at least these days, voluntarily for a period of time and it is more like a job, where they get paid according to their rank by the government. Being a soldier or a cop is more like being an employee of a company, which is also a hierarchy, than living in a socialist state. Most of us spend a period of time in the military in order to "do our duty" and serve our country, to help "provide for the common defence". Saying we have a military and a police force in no way excuses socializing the healthcare system or any other area of America. We have remained great because of capitalism and competition. Capitalism fuels the American dream. Our freedom from state control and to create wealth is what draws people to this country. Capitalism rewards hard work and ingenuity. Socialism rewards inactivity and slothfulness. Ask the people who have been devestated by LBJ's welfare state.

  • SeanRenaud said on Jul 31, 2009....

    While I you know good and well that a hierarchy that you are basically powerelss to overcome is one of the marks of socialism and is part of our military.  You can only go through the ranks so fast.  There is no magical I invented Google Go straight to General.  But that's not the point.  The point as far as the military being socialist is that it is funded by the government and has no competition in the traditional capitalist sense.  Obviously there are foriegn militaries but we don't compete for jobs. 

    Having a public health care plan should in no way harm the private insurance.  Any form that passes in the US will be no more harmful than the USPS.

    Capitalism is what makes the US great but it has to be regulated inteligently and sometimes that means adding a bit of (or in this case better management of existing) socialism to keep it doing what is best for all of us.

     

  • ALIENated said on Aug 01, 2009....

    Again, I really see no bearing of the military on health care. The military is more like a company that the government funds to take care of our enemies than a socialistic, government-run system that is "supposed" to take care of us. A kind of healthcare system is provided for our military personell. They get the necessary shots they need to go overseas, they get their blown up parts sawed and capped off, they get bullets removed, and most of it is done by doctors and nurses trained in a free society who will eventually go back to their private practices. Most of it has nothing to do with the kind of care regular people and older people need.

    I also find it funny that most liberals hate the military, but now, in this healthcare debate, they hold the military up as a shining example of government expertise. As usual, Democrats / liberals want it both ways. No doubt, when logic returns, and this healthcare bill fails, liberals will say "see, Republicans hate the military". It must be fun to live in loony liberal land.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 01, 2009....

    Okay one last time.  A socialist program is a program that is funded completely by the government.  It has nothing to do with anything else.  America is not a socialist country but it has a number of government funded and hense socialist programs.  The military, NASA, the FBI, CIA amongst anything.  Any government program is inherently socialist.  Period.  Even when those programs have a civilian counterpart as is the case with the school systems, postal delivery and to a lesser degree policing, anybody who's really got something to protect picks up private security for it but that's a bit of a stretch.  Fire departments, public highways all of these are socialist programs paid for with our tax dollars.

    If the government funds you and is your sole form of funding you are a socialized system.  Pretty much period end discussion.  The only kinda  exceptions are companies like Lockheed Martin and other military suppliers who at least have competetion and I imagine probably do work in the civillian sector for something anyway.

    Most liberals do no hate the military and never did.  That is some fantasy bullshit the Right imagined up.

    Liberals won't say anything, the health care bill seems unlikely to get passed in its present state, since it's not going to work.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 01, 2009....

    I think I see your point about the military only because I saw some discussion on TV about the healthcare legislation. The pro-Obamacare people kept shouting that the military is socialist and Medicare is socialism. They made no more sense than you do. I suppose that is the current left-wing mantra. And by the way, I would prefer we did not have a military or Medicare. Did you ask for money to be taken from your paycheck for Medicare? I did not, but I damn sure want back what I paid into it. I would take a lump sum check and call it even. I was paid to be in the military because we were fighting a war, not because I wanted to take part in a socialist system. I am sorry but that is just apples and oranges as far as I am concerned. It is just one of those arguments that liberals like to throw at you as if it makes any sense or any difference. Not to mention that the military experience affects only a small portion of society (mostly young healthy men and now a few women). Socialism will affect our whole country. Make no mistake. We are not just talking about Obamacare. We are talking about moving our country toward socialism. I think Borax is more on track with that second definition, the Marxist theory in which socialism is the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. BHO wants to convert this country to socialism. He wants to be the first Big Brother. I cannot imagine why, but neither can I imagine why he thinks the way he does about a lot of things. I suppose when the devil has your ear every falsehood rings true. We look at history and wonder how certain people rise to the top and how they could have been so cruel and monsterous. Mark my words. We are about to find out.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 01, 2009....

    Okay you aren't understand and I don't understand what you are having difficulty with.  The military doesn't only effect a small portion of our nation.  it effects our entire nation.  The latest numbers I've seen claim the military makes up 10% of our nations spending which means you'd be paying 10% less in taxes if the military wasn't socialist=paid in tax dollars.  If we had no military your taxes would be lower because you pay for the military.  The military is socialist because the government is its form of income.  Please explain to me what part of government funding you aren't understanding because you haven't made it clear and nor has Java.  You are both stuck in this insane notion that the military isn't a socialist program because the entire nation isn't forced to deal with it which has nothing to do with the meaning of the word. 

    Socialism cannot be a transition to communism because communism and socialism aren't parts of the same spectrum.  Socialism is an economic ideal like capitalism.  Communism is a political ideal like democracy, dictatorships and monarchies.  While oft tied together they are completely separate.  You could be a democratic republican socialist nation (in fact this is almost the most rational following Dictactor Capitalism). 

  • ALIENated said on Aug 02, 2009....

    Call the military socialism if you must. That is just a matter of semantics and I still see no relavence to anything. The military is provided for in the constitution and I would be the first to agree that I would prefer it not cost so much, but I think both sides of the aisle are responsible for that. And the American people do not care as much about paying for protection (from other nations in which our president would be a better fit). Other things that OhBummer is doing (like Obamacare) is replacing privately sector things with government-run things. Who can compete with the government and its ability to tax and print play money? Who is going to help you when you have a problem with your healthcare and you try to sue? ha ha ha. Today the court system helps. Under Obamacare (or anything run by the government) you would just be up shit creek. "This is the law" would be the answer to most complaints. Liberals and Obamalovers want to liken Obamacare to the military. I say liken it to the IRS. That would be a much better comparison. The IRS can rape you without vasoline as long as the law is on their side. And remember, the IRS like Obamacare, is taking your hard-earned money to fund things you are probably not even in favor of.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 02, 2009....

    And all the reasons you listed a reasons why this current Healthcare bill is toxif an must be stopped and these are things you need to be saying.  Not crying about socialism when we've got plenty of it around.

    You also need to be making (and I've heard you make it before) a rational case that less government funding for medicine would bring down prices.  That prices now are artificially high because of the nature of supply and demand and specifically inflation.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 03, 2009....

    ... less government funding for medicine would bring down prices

    Oh my god, you can learn. I knew you could do it. As I said elsewhere the takeover of the healthcare system is not about solving the problem. If it was, Barry would be advocating setting up a government system of doctors and hospitals like the VA, which would be comparable to the post office. Then people could provide for themselves or, if they see that the government-run system is better, they could get into that. However, that is not the underlying reason for this legislation. It is just a steppingstone to socialism in general and you know that. LBJ started his Great Society bull crap, which included Medicare, and we have been trying to get rid it ever since. Barry knows you cannot mix socialism and capitalism, which is why he wants to take us even farther into socialism. The goal is communism and China is the model. China is not a capitalist nation. It is a communist nation that chooses to deal with capitalists (us). And I am probably going to lose you here, but the plan is even bigger than what Barry has in mind. In fact, HE is a steppingstone to one world government. The Star Trek generation stupidly thinks we need one world government in order to venture into space, which may or may not be true (we will certainly need very good cooperation). However, one world governent is a goal of the devil and is fortold in the Bible. We are simply living through a time predicted long ago by God Himself. See, I told you I would lose you, but the truth is often stranger than fiction.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 03, 2009....
    The thing is ALIEN you keep saying it but when we look at countries that have tried it, Mexico and Hong Kong both immediatly come to mind it hasn't workd.  Not ever.  Logic doesn't always work on the economy.
  • ALIENated said on Aug 03, 2009....

    You lost me. Mexico and Hong Kong have tried what? Socialism?

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 03, 2009....
    Completely capitalist health care.  Nobody wants to believe as much as me that we can solve every problem ever with Capitalism.  But the fact is that if that were the case we would never have tried anything else because capitalism (particularly in the way that many Republicans seem to recognize it) basically boils down to whoever has the most toys in the end wins.  And really that's just natural selection.  Lions and Hyenas figured out Capitalism.  It's just the way the universe worked and if all things in the human experience worked out in the most natural way way possible nobody would ever have even figured out socialism.

     

    And as has been pointed out time and time again the entire rest of the civilized world pays less and gets more for their health care than we do.  The bottom line is mostly like that Jesus was right.  A man cannot serve two masters.  WE need to EITHER go 100% capitalism and understand that it REQUIRES us to let people who cannot afford various forms of treatment to die (yes this includes Granny IF YOU PERSONALLY can't pay.) and deal with it (and the rise in crime) or we need to move to a system that is going to deal with problems while they are still small rather than let them escalate to life or death.  Stuck in the middle where we are now of course we're getting fucked from both ends.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 04, 2009....

    ... the entire rest of the civilized world pays less and gets more for their health care than we do.

    I am just not sure that is true. Laura Ingraham was reading a list of things about the American healthcare system the other day that does not agree with that, like cancer cure rates, etc.

    I am not against some kind of government regulation of the healthcare system or a government-sponsored alternative system. Barry wants government to be in total control with no other options. That is what I am against. I just see him taking over segments of our economy with the goal of taking over eveything. That is the scary part of all this. Plus the fact that people are not seeing that. I have never understood how the good people of Germany stood by and let Hitler do what he did, but that is no longer a mystery.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 04, 2009....

    I don't see how you don't understand how Hitler took over.  That is simple.  Obama is in no way relatable to Hitler though, Bush is much closer in personality and even then it's just frantic stretching.

    The probably isn't taking over bits, it's that this move will probably take over the Health Care industry in its entireity within a decade or so once the grandfathered people change (or the grandfathered systems change) whichever lands first.  Either way it's bad news.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 04, 2009....

    Yes, I know Barry is no Hitler (at least I hope not). He is probably more like Stalin or Castro. Anyway, he is either incredibly stupid, too lazy to read what is in the legislation, or does not care and simply wants the government to take over everything, which will put us on the road to communism. I personally think it is the last possibility. He is not stupid enough to think the legislation will be good for America ... is he? Even if he has not read the legislation, he would have heard all these bad notions by now, and, if he is the saint you think he is, he would be putting on the brakes. So it has to be the last possibility, right. Of course, he is a Democrat so maybe he is just incredibly stupid.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2009....
    First I don't think he's a saint.  I simply think Sarah Palin is the worst possible thing that could happen to any country ever.  She wouldn't put us on the road to being a Theocracy,  We'd just wake up and be a Theocracy.  Second no American ever is going to put us on the road to Communism.  Socialism maybe, but even that is a stretch.  We would probably mimic the European countries which while they are more socialist than we are they are still capitalists at heart.  Honestly if he started by eliminating all the tax loops that the rich use to pay less taxes than the rest of us it would be a good start.  he's supposed to be closeing them but I've seen no solid motion from him and it dissapoints me.
  • kevinunknown said on Aug 05, 2009....

    I am curious as a socialist what you don’t like about socialism as it is the fairest system.  Also I would also like to make you aware that socialism doesn’t seek to control the population of a state but just the economy of a state. The point made about the military is very important because it demonstrates the restrictions on achieving a pure capitalist state; America is not a pure capitalist state. Indeed there is no state that can claim to be pure capitalist because it is impossible to have everything in a state being run by private business this could only be made possible if a private business was to run the state. This has been tried in the past most recently Simon Mann’s Wonga coup arguably tried to achieve this however the coup was unsuccessful.  

  • ALIENated said on Aug 05, 2009....

    The big miscommunication here is that you think Barry has good intentions and is just trying to help people with the healthcare legislation. I, on the other hand, think he is a Marxist and wants to put us on the road to communism. Statements like "redistributing wealth" is what indicates that. I know nothing is pure, but I want the government to play the lest role in our lives possible. The bigger government gets, the harder it will be to control. At some point, we will all be serving a system that is out of our control -- the Beast. I once had a pastor that taught from the book of Revelations for many Sundays. His theory was that the Beast is The System, our system of government. We are already being marked with the number of the Beast (social security numbers, credit card numbers, account numbers, telephone numbers, etc.). And it is pretty easy to see that the Beast has a spirit of anti-Christ (abortions, homosexuality, something for nothing, etc.). Democrats seem to think big government is the answer to everything when, in fact, it is their worst nightmare. Obama may not be the maniac I think he is, but the next guy might be, and with so much government power, who will stop him? If agents of the IRS came and took your neighbors away, would you think that much about it? Beaurocrats do stupid things every day to cover their incompetence. The more of them we have around, the worse off we will be. Again, it is really incredible to me that Americans are now making excuses for Barry's pushing towards socialism. We have struggled for years to deal with the socialism brought on by FDR and LBJ. We need to be headed the other way instead of promoting their nanny state. This nanny state is broke, as I heard a Senator recently say.

    Kevin: sorry you live in a socialist state. If you lived in poop up to your waste, you would probably think that is normal, too. It is not the best way to live. A socialist state rewards everyone for doing nothing. Capitalism rewards hard work and innovation. That is why America is possibly the greatest nation in all history.

  • kevinunknown said on Aug 05, 2009....

    Alien—I found that last paragraph rather insulting. I live in a democracy and therefore have a choice to vote for a Socialist party and that is what I do. I do this because I have read their manifesto’s I have a  good understanding of differing political, economic, social and religious ideologies not because I “live up to my waist in poop”, I could make the same point about you and living in  a Capitalist state. A move towards Socialism is not a move towards Communism indeed Lennon once said that the two could not coexist peacefully.

    You also said that America “is possibly the greatest nation in all history”. How can you make such a claim about a nation that at best has a confused culture and at worst a non-existent culture? How can you say it is the greatest nation in all history when in comparison to other nations it has no history? America has nothing on the grate countries of history that have existed for millennium such as the powerful Mongolian and Persian empires or the great thinkers of the world such as the Greeks and hasn’t even started acquiring the architectural genius of the Renaissance nations of France and Italy and the other European grates.

     You also sate your reasoning for America perhaps being the greatest nation in all of history is its Capitalism. Well America never inverted capitalism it evolved over years in Europe and Asia as a natural outgrowth of economic and social conditions. It was the Scottish philosopher Adam Smith however who first went about explaining the characteristics of the free market in 1776, but it was just another example of Scottish genius. America is not the only capitalist state in the world so it is rather ignorant of you to sagest that American capitalism in some way makes America the greatest nation in the world. I cannot convey my dismay at such a claim for so many reasons, I admire your patriotism but that does not excuse you for insulting me and then making such an outlandish and plain ridiculous claim.

  • javadewd said on Aug 05, 2009....
    Kev, no offense, but I got three words for you : Yankee Doodle Dandy

    The fairest system of all hasn't been put into action yet. It is called Egalitarianism. There's a reason for that, and it is because not all people within any sort of society agree to play by the rules. If they did, there would be no such thing as a criminal, con artist, political opportunist or arrogant blow-hard. Such a Utopian society simply cannot exist to the fullest extent of the word without some sort of mental / social manipulation at its core to keep everybody in check... Including the leaders!
  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 05, 2009....

    I'll have to remember to get back to ALIEN at some point.

    1.  True a move towards socialism isn't by definition a move towards communism.  They are apples and oranges.  However socialism cannot produce the same quality of goods or people that capitalism can and does on an everyday basis.  There is a reason why so many innovations originate in the United States.  There is a reason why this "young" country has amassed so much money and become currently the sole super power. 

    Socialism is not fair by any stretch of the imagination.  It is equal.  Those words mean different things.  It is not fair that a man who does less work or less valuble work (ie a doctor vs a gardener) is rewarded equally.  It is however equal.

    2.  I'm not sure how you can claim America has confused or no culture.  I mean when our "culture" is the one infecting the rest of the world as we stretch out.  More importantly it's rather ignorant to call America a young nation.  Young because we were the last ones "founded" is what I'm assuming your going with.  So it means nothing that we have the oldest Constitution in existance.  That basically we are the OLDEST country because the rest have all changed governments (some several times) since we've come into being.  It only took one try for America to get it right and remain strong enough to be unconquered.  Oh and quell the uprisings.  We don't have the IRA, nor do we have Quebec which is only part of Canada by geography.  It clearly has a complete cultural divide from the rest of the nation to include a different primary language.

    3.  Nobody invented Capitalism, it was defined and you're right Americans didn't discover or define it.  They merely perfected it.  To a point where people have migrated from everywhere to be American.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 05, 2009....

    Kev, what country do you live in ... Norway, Sweden, or Finland?

  • kevinunknown said on Aug 06, 2009....

    Java—your right I do agree with you Egalitarianism would be the fairest system but it’s never going to happen because everyone hold different beliefs

    SR—Socialism can produce goods on the same level as Capitalism because a Socialist economy can run with Capitalist elements so provide the correct goods and services are nationalised such as banks, utilities, transport ect those left over such as cars, shops and other manufacturing industries can work as Capitalist venture’s, provided there is strict regulatory bodies to police them.

    Socialism is fair, allot people think that “redistribution of wealth” means all of one’s earnings going into on central pot and then being evenly redistributed amongst the population of a state. That’s not how it works the Doctor would be taxed higher than the Gardener however both the Doctor and gardener would receive the same goods and services from the state regardless of their income.

    Just because America has purged the rest of the world with branded clothes, manufactured awful “musicians” and disgusting fast food chains does not mean it has a culture. Culture should be something originating from society not form big business.

    Just because America has the oldest constitution (which I think is a bit of a joke) does not mean it is the oldest state in the world, Brittan has no written constitution and is allot older than America. As far as American history goes it has nothing on the history of the Italians, Greek, British or French to name but a few. I do not doubt that in the last 70 years or so America has been the dominate figure on the world stage however that is changing. Arguably America is not longer the sole world superpower as China emerges powerful and the EU moves towards ratifying a treaty that will effectively make it the most powerful Alliance in the whole of human history.

    As for your last claim America on her own never perfected capitalism this is because Capitalism was perfected through an outgrowth of social and economic changes occurring on a global scale. America only truly prospered to great wealth because of the global markets, now that prosperous stage in its existence has come to an end. In the 20th and 21st century America was not the only state to have grate innovations originating in the minds of its population so that is not a strong argument for claiming America to be the greatest nation in all of history.

    Alien—for your information I am British.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 06, 2009....

    Were you born British? Are you caucasian, black, Indian, Muslim, Chrisitian, homo, straight?

    How may men has Britian put on the moon? How many world wars has Britian won (without the U.S.). How many cold wars has Britian won? [yawn]

  • kevinunknown said on Aug 06, 2009....

    Haha America couldn’t have put man on the moon without British inventions and most of the pioneering engineers off the Apollo program were European scientists taken after the Second World War to work in America. Arguably it was British intelligence that won the cold war.  Just as Brittan couldn’t have won World War 2 without American help, America couldn’t have won without British help.  And might I remind you of the help Brittan has provided America in the war on terror.

    Alien—you have are narrow minded you can never see the other side of the story. You don’t have the intellect to have an argument on this subject without firing insults. Come back to me when you have your Master’s degree in International relations and politics with a 5th year postgrad in security studies until then do me a favour and fuck off.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 06, 2009....

    1.  So you're already not talking socialism.  You're talking hybrid systems. Infact based on what you said in your opening paragraph you believe certain industries are too important to be ruled by Captialism.  While your wrong I understand your theory and I'm curious what ventures, specifically you feel should be handled this way.  I'm also curious as to what kinds of Strict Regulations in general you believe should be in place.

    2.  How is the Doctor and the Gardner receiving equal products for their money any different from a great big pot?  Hell it seems a Great Big Pot would be more efficient, just give everybody a government supplied credit card.

    3.  Says you.  It's not just our clothing though, it is our music, our movies, our books.

    4.  How many times has England changed rulers?  Not by succession but by revolusion.  Clock starts over the exact second you get taken over.  Like Japan, just over sixty years right now.  Otherwise there is no good reason why America shouldn't be able to claim the combine histories of Spain, England and France as our own.

    5.  Britian would have won WW2 without us.  It just would have been really really really awful.  Say what you want about Europeans today as WW2 sapped any will to fight from them.  The RAF would never have lost and Hitler would still have marched on Russia and made the same mistakes and Russia would have broken his back forcing at worst a stalemate.

    It doesn't really matter if we would never have done X without Britian though, fact is we did it.  We would never have come up with the Constitution without the Magna Carta but the fact is that we did come up with the Constitution.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 06, 2009....

    Kev, you did not answer any of my questions. I just want to know where you are coming from, like if you are a native Brit. BTW, I have a masters degree myself, from a college. I have a Doctorate in Common Sense. And I would think the narrow minded person is the person who tells others to fuck off.

  • javadewd said on Aug 06, 2009....
    Oh, fuck off...

    ...Just kidding!
  • kevinunknown said on Aug 06, 2009....

    SR—i have to say i enjoy debating with you as you always seem to come up with good points to contradict what i say and they makes sense. Your right I am talking about hybrid systems but ideally I would like more emphasis on the Socialist side. I must confess although I still maintain America doesn’t really have much of a culture I do enjoy your movies. I disagree with you on point #4 because I really don’t think that just because a country change’s the way it is governed means it has been totally reborn and the clock should start at zero but I can understand your point of view in this matter and respect it even though I disagree.

    Alien—I stand by what I said fuck off. What does my back ground have to do with anything unless you’re a racist homophobe? As far as your insults towards Brittan go you would do well to remember who founded you and that there is a very good chance you you’re self have British assertors.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 06, 2009....

    I have no problem with hybrid systems, infact I readily admit that capitalism in it's purest form ultimately does more harm than good.  I'll even go the extra step and say that every so often it is beneficial to capitalism to knock the top couple of rungs off the ladder.  There is only so much room at the top and once you get there it's really hard to get you down, add in the ability to just pass the crown down from generation to generation and we may as well have royalty.

    I'm curiuos why you would want to err towards socialism which is provably (and common sense wise) inferior.  I mean just on common sense human beings like being rewarded and will work harder when they will be rewarded for said efforts.  But provably the quality of living is higher in the US, the number of inventions and patents coming out of us is better, despite our shitty "schools"  when people go to college they come to America (and England, can't forget you guys got a few) 

    While I think that part of your reason for not wanting to believe that a country that has gone through a revolution is henseforth a new country is you want to be right.  I only want to ask a question.  Since borders have changed (and presumably will in the future)  How do we judge the age of a country?  Is America 230 (give or take?) because that's when we beat the Brits or are we 500 dating back to Columbus?  Considering what an influence England in particular has had on us why can't we claim Britian, (Canadians do).  Do we count Spain as part of the Islamic Empires.  The Ottoman Empire stretched rather far until less than a century ago.  Physically the land has been there since forever, so you must be talking about cultures.  Things like language, religion and cuisine that don't change much with regimes. 

    Britian only kinda founded America.  You were just the last man standing is much more accurate.  It's not vital to know where you were from, it only makes a difference if you came from someplace worse.  For example I would expect a person who immigrated from the Gaza Strip to Mexico to think that the Mexican government is the best damn thing ever to happen to the world.  It is a matter of degrees.

  • ALIENated said on Aug 06, 2009....

    Sorry Kev, I am mostly Irish, a couple of drops of English, and a drop or two of American Indian. Are you a native Brit, a caucasian, or a transplant, a Muslim? I can only deduce that you are a homosexual from your attitude and your willingness to be told what to do by the state. I figure most homos think socialism is OK because it will force everyone to accept homosexuality. And you better watch out. Sean is a black man. I am so racist I rarely talk to him.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 06, 2009....

    Homosexuality and socialism have less tha nothing to do with each other.  (aside from Dems support both).  Hell given the increasing number of homos it's distinctly anti-capitalist to deny equal financial situations for both groups.

    Also mostly Irish with a few drops of English makes you white.  Look in the mirror, do you more closely resemble Obama or EVERY OTHER GODDAMN US PRESIDENT EVER.  If you can answer the latter you are a minority (possibly black but since most the world is covered with pigmented people that isn't really a sure bet) if not you're white.  Whites happens to own so much of the civilized world that they have felt the need to further segregate themselves but that doesn't change what they are.

  • kevinunknown said on Aug 07, 2009....

    The reason I disagree with your point about a country being reborn after a significant change of government or a revaluation is because I think there needs to be more to it than that. For example in Somalia in the past 2 decades there has been countless coup’s with changes of government as a result however the population, name, boundaries, and culture of the nation has remained the same you wouldn’t say it’s only a few years old because it is clearly not. Even by your argument America would not be the oldest county on Earth.  If I thought you were right I would say so.

    Even although America was the last one standing it was still Brittan that founded America and filled its population with Anglo-Saxons as well as other Europeans. I liked your point there about whites owning so much of the civilised world in that last line.

  • javadewd said on Aug 07, 2009....
    See? Sean has no problem existing within a government system that allows him to be poked in the ass, mentally or physically, because he likes it! Hey, Mikey!

    Kev's pigmentation shouldn't have anything to do with his ideals... Unless he's like Mormon or part of the Black Liberation Movement or a reject from the Black Panthers or something!
  • ALIENated said on Aug 07, 2009....

    I only question Kev's makeup in order to understand why he would bend over for socialism. I can understand why the people in Norway, Sweden, and Finland would go for it (if they do ???), but not caucasian Brits (unless maybe they are homos and they want the government to force others to accept their way of life).

    Anyway, I heard some politician from England on the Laura Ingraham show last night. He is going around Washington D.C. giving talks about how screwed up the healthcare system in England is. He recognizes that America has the best care possible and that is why people are lined up to get it. He also mentioned how most of the good doctors have fled Canada and come here to practice. That would explain why some of the doctors in Canada think they have a good system. Since most of the good doctors are gone, they are in higher demand.

    Also, just as Obama is 1/16th black and calls himself a black man, I am an American Indian because I am 1/16th indian -- not.

  • SeanRenaud said on Aug 07, 2009....

    1.  So again Kevin you're basic idea is that a country is based on it's population and culture.  And while I would still say that language and other cultural things aside I would still say the French and Spanairds had just as much to do with the founding of America as the Brits (just the Brits were the last ones standing after several wars to see who was in charge.  Why can't America claim to be what you claim it to be.  An off shoot of Britan?  Why can't we claim your history as our own, we already effectively do.  We don't study Chinese History or African History because it had little influence on who we are.

    2.  Java's an idiot.

    3.  Again ALIEN socialism has NOTHING to do with gays.  Hell if you ever heard of this one party called the National Socialist Party, they kinda hunted down and killed gays. 

    America has the best healthcare. . .for the rich. 

    Also Obama LOOKS black.  Tell me again how he wouldn't get hassled by the cops cus people would look at him and say oh he's not black.  Maybe one of his ancestors way back when but he's not black.

  • kevinunknown said on Aug 07, 2009....

    SR- I have to say upon reflection you do possibly have a point about claiming some British history as your own indeed Brittan dose have a profound role in your early history saying that however you cannot claim to be part of all British history.  Also I don’t think there is really much point in trying to get through to Alien anyone who thinks that ones ethnic and sexual background has anything to do with Socialism clearly has no grasp of the subject there for ignore him.  

  • javadewd said on Aug 07, 2009....
    That's SR, making half a point...

    So what's the difference between SeanRenaud and Sean Hannity? They're both blow-hards who can only make half a point at a time. The other half pretty much cancels their point out and makes them look like an idiot anyway. They also like to demonize their opponents and make them look ten times worse than what they really are. I love how SR likes to make me out to be the mouth-piece of the Republican party. As if, but oh well. I'd rather be the mouth-piece than the ass-piece of half-ass conservative Democrats in the land of fruits, nuts and flakes.
  • ALIENated said on Aug 07, 2009....

    Kev, this is my post. Never forget that I have the ultimate power to ignore ... you. I am just trying to understand why anyone would want to live in a socialist society. It has to be that they feel they could not make it in a capitalist society. And why would you be ashamed of what or who you are?

  • kevinunknown said on Aug 07, 2009....

    Alien—I have written a blog on Socialism myself it’s basically what I like about it feel free to have a read. It’s not that I am ashamed of who I am it’s that it has not relevance to this blog. For your information I am a Caucasian, British, heterosexual, Christen however what really annoys me is that I get the impression if I was to tell you I was say a Hispanic, Mexican, Muslim homosexual you would find fault with me for it and that sort of mentality truly disgusts me.

  • javadewd said on Aug 07, 2009....
    Yeah, I've been on Kev's SOCIALISM blog post. It reminded me of a passage I once read in a book called Why I'm not a Calvinist so I gave it a Why I'm not an Armenian response, and then I got marginalized by comparing it to my country, the US of A. Oh, well. I guess we're all a bit biased and proud of where we come from. Kev does good research, so I'm sure probing into Capitalism and US American History won't be boring for him.
  • ALIENated said on Aug 07, 2009....

    To be honest with you, Kev, I was trying to find out if you were a Muslim transplanted to Britian. I was just curious if that was maybe why you were a socialist. To me, socialism is just the final nail in England's casket. The final resting place of a great nation that once ruled most of the world. I find it sad, but I suppose it is good to accept one's fate.

    BTW, I like hispanics and Mexicans. They are great people (except maybe the drug trafficers). Also, I have homosexual friends and relatives. I am also a Christian and I pray for them. Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Comment on "What Is Socialism"

politics socialism OhBummer idiots ALIENation (Click to add tags below)

(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)

Weak on foreign policy, sold out to the nutty left on domestic policy, now lets fuck with national security and have trials for terrorists in federal courts....
Every week, I delve into our local city entertainment/op-ed/newspaper....
He didn't even try to answer it. What would be your answer? Were we right in dropping the bombs on Japan?...
The only human being on the planet that can eject a huge turd, yet somehow dupe the media into thinking it's a golden egg that smells like roses....
How's Obama doing with the economy and his stimulus.......