Everyone understands that Socialism is not Communism, right?

[Grokmaster]

For days now, The Sleepy PP, has tried to equate the two, you do know they are not the same thing, right?

The entire basis of communism, as defined in "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells,etal, 1848) , was glaringly plagiarized from the founding document of socilism, "The Social Contract" (Rousseau, 1762).


Ger educted, insted of trumpeting your ignorance.

 

[QP!]

The entire basis of communism, as defined in "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells,etal, 1848) , was glaringly plagiarized from the founding document of socilism, "The Social Contract" (Rousseau, 1762).


Ger educted, insted of trumpeting your ignorance.

yes communism coopted and bastardized a lot of socialism and takes it to a more extreme form.

Socialism requires a strong State government apparatus that is 'of and for the people and puts the people, (not corporations) at the front'.

Communism per Marx is the dissolution of all State apparatus and gov't and basically a full anarchy State that runs on its own with no governing body.

YOu can show a similar co-opt path between Democracy and Fascism and how one takes concepts of the other and distorts them.

WHat that DOES NOT means is that Socialism or Democracy is then leading to Communism or Fascism.

 

[Hume]

The entire basis of communism, as defined in "The Communist Manifesto" (Marx, Engells,etal, 1848) , was glaringly plagiarized from the founding document of socilism, "The Social Contract" (Rousseau, 1762).


Ger educted, insted of trumpeting your ignorance.

The Social Contract is not about socialism. You are profoundly stupid.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Jarod]

View attachment 98677

What is “the truth” they were teaching?

Teaching should not be indoctrination, it should let students make their own value conclusions.

 

[Lionfish]

What is “the truth” they were teaching?

Teaching should not be indoctrination, it should let students make their own value conclusions.

I don't live in FL.
You have to ask your Governor. .

 

[WCM]

For days now, The Sleepy PP, has tried to equate the two, you do know they are not the same thing, right?

What difference does it really make when all the power in your country is seized by a bunch of ultra-violent liars and crooks?

Does it make a difference if:

1. there is still some private ownership, but everything is either taxed to oblivion or owned by a few oligarchs, or
2. everything is technically owned by the state, but oligarchs still get all the money?

It's like being Jewish and being asked to surrender by a group that you suspect are Palestinians but they swear that they're Nazis. Does it really make any difference?

 

[Jarod]

What difference does it really make when all the power in your country is seized by a bunch of ultra-violent liars and crooks?

Does it make a difference if:

1. there is still some private ownership, but everything is either taxed to oblivion or owned by a few oligarchs, or
2. everything is technically owned by the state, but oligarchs still get all the money?

It's like being Jewish and being asked to surrender by a group that you suspect are Palestinians but they swear that they're Nazis. Does it really make any difference?

It makes a huge difference, it’s just a matter of degree. We need more social welfare programs, Denmark needs more automatous industry.

We need less billionaires and a larger middle class and less poor people.

 

[Lionfish]

It makes a huge difference, it’s just a matter of degree. We need more social welfare programs, Denmark needs more automatous industry.

We need less billionaires and a larger middle class and less poor people.

Move to Cuba. You social problems weii be solved.
Take a few liberal friends with you.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

It makes a huge difference, it’s just a matter of degree. We need more social welfare programs,

Why? It is absolutely clear that endless social-welfare programs are a net negative for a nation. They both drain wealth and create a non-productive underclass of people.

Denmark needs more automatous industry.

That's Denmark's problem.

We need less billionaires and a larger middle class and less poor people.

We need a larger middle class. How many billionaires there are is irrelevant. To get more middle class means deregulating, lowering taxes, and getting government out of the way. As for the poor... There will always be a portion of any society that is lazy, stupid, and even wanting to be poor.

 

[Jarod]

Move to Cuba. You social problems weii be solved.
Take a few liberal friends with you.

No thinks, Communism doesn’t work well.

It’s a beautiful nation, and wonderful people, very low crime, but no id not like to live there.

I was surprised how quickly I noticed the lack of advertising and how refreshing that was.

 

[Lionfish]

No thinks, Communism doesn’t work well.

No thinks is something you are very good at.

It’s a beautiful nation, and wonderful people, very low crime, but no id not like to live there.

They need auto parts.

I was surprised how quickly I noticed the lack of advertising and how refreshing that was.

Advertising is not needed in socialist countries. Everything is free and provided by the government.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

No thinks, Communism doesn’t work well.

Yes, you "No thinks."

It’s a beautiful nation, and wonderful people, very low crime, but no id not like to live there.

I was surprised how quickly I noticed the lack of advertising and how refreshing that was.

Of course there's no advertising there. There's nothing to buy.

 

[QP!]

Why? It is absolutely clear that endless social-welfare programs are a net negative for a nation. They both drain wealth and create a non-productive underclass of people.

just as it is clear that too few social welfare programs are a net negative for a nation. They allow for too large a percent of people to fall into debt (medical, other) and end up costing society more, in the end, then a good social network does, creating a completely disenfranchised non productive underclass of people who see no help and no way out and just quit.

...
We need a larger middle class.

agreed

How many billionaires there are is irrelevant.

agreed

To get more middle class means deregulating, lowering taxes, and getting government out of the way.

History says the exact opposite. Name a top GDP country on this planet whose key to building a successful middle class was by having a minimally involved gov't? History shows us the nations who built a big and vibrant MC all, EVERY ONE OF THEM, had governments that were super active in promoting it thru very directed policies to help uplinft them, provide key infrastracture, etc.

When gov't has stayed out and private interests have tried to do it, such as EVERY SINGLE EXAMPLE you wrong cite as your private sector proof they can provide major highways and road, IT HAS FAILED.

As for the poor... There will always be a portion of any society that is lazy, stupid, and even wanting to be poor.

While there will always be some poor due to those circumstances you will have vastly more poor who end up that way simply because you have no social services. Most working lower class who can cut it with a baseline of healthcare provided will end up in medical bankruptcy with just one major illness, as just one example.

America will see a significant number of people suffer this as Trump tax cuts for the rich, he paid for cutting the Medicaid help. An average wage 60 year old will see their insurance premiums go up about $10,000 and as a result many will just go unsured and be one major health event from bankruptcy.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Jarod]

Yes, you "No thinks."

Of course there's no advertising there. There's nothing to buy.

I bought plenty.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I bought plenty.

You bought advertising space in Cuba? For what? Got an example, maybe a picture or two? Website?

 

[Grokmaster]

yes communism coopted and bastardized a lot of socialism and takes it to a more extreme form.

Socialism requires a strong State government apparatus that is 'of and for the people and puts the people, (not corporations) at the front'.

Communism per Marx is the dissolution of all State apparatus and gov't and basically a full anarchy State that runs on its own with no governing body.

YOu can show a similar co-opt path between Democracy and Fascism and how one takes concepts of the other and distorts them.

WHat that DOES NOT means is that Socialism or Democracy is then leading to Communism or Fascism.

Completely wrong. Communism establishes TOTAL GOVERNMENT CONTROL., AS DOES SOCIALIsM AS DESCRIBED BY ITS FOUNDER, rOUSSEAU, IN "tHE SOCIAL CONTRACT". (Chapter 7, "The Lawgiver". )

 

[Grokmaster]

View attachment 99005

That is the absolute truth of the matter.