Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Interesting take On Socialism

Liberalism.jpg

 

Honored Social Butterfly

The theory that the Democratic party is adopting Socialism has a couple of problems. First, you have to define what is meant by Socialism. The party is certainly not adopting the policies championed by the author of the newspaper clipping.  Then, you have to describe which policies the party is proposing should be considered Socialist according to your definition

 

A further problem the right has is that so many countries are implementing policies with the word Socialist which are much more successful than America's policies that generations are asking the question......"So?"

0 Kudos
210 Views
3
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

The theory that the Democratic party is adopting Socialism has a couple of problems. First, you have to define what is meant by Socialism. The party is certainly not adopting the policies championed by the author of the newspaper clipping.  Then, you have to describe which policies the party is proposing should be considered Socialist according to your definition

 

A further problem the right has is that so many countries are implementing policies with the word Socialist which are much more successful than America's policies that generations are asking the question......"So?"


The Sinclair thoughts were not about ideology, they were about "selling" the ideology.

 

This has been going on for almost a century. Believers in the thinking of Marx saw the disaster the USSR was for their ideology and the "thinkers" have been trying to fins a better way to implement them. Sinclair, for example, was a Socialist and then there was the Frankfurt School intellectuals attempting to find a way to "sell" Marxist ideology and implement it safely first in Germany and then here.

0 Kudos
232 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

The Sinclair thoughts were not about ideology, they were about "selling" the ideology.

 

This has been going on for almost a century. Believers in the thinking of Marx saw the disaster the USSR was for their ideology and the "thinkers" have been trying to fins a better way to implement them. Sinclair, for example, was a Socialist and then there was the Frankfurt School intellectuals attempting to find a way to "sell" Marxist ideology and implement it safely first in Germany and then here.


Hmm Well, it would appear the Canadians, Norwegians, and Fins, among many other countries, have found a way to implement it safely and successfully. Perhaps we should learn from more successful countries.

0 Kudos
228 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

The Sinclair thoughts were not about ideology, they were about "selling" the ideology.

 

This has been going on for almost a century. Believers in the thinking of Marx saw the disaster the USSR was for their ideology and the "thinkers" have been trying to fins a better way to implement them. Sinclair, for example, was a Socialist and then there was the Frankfurt School intellectuals attempting to find a way to "sell" Marxist ideology and implement it safely first in Germany and then here.


Hmm Well, it would appear the Canadians, Norwegians, and Fins, among many other countries, have found a way to implement it safely and successfully. Perhaps we should learn from more successful countries.


Hmmm - it appears you have switched from "selling" (the topic) to "implementing". Was that intentional?

0 Kudos
239 Views
0
Report
Regular Social Butterfly

When the NARCISSISTIC ideology took over.... the only way is not going to be an easy path to clean up their messes!!!  So, where are we today, under the control of the narcissistic body. Well thank you for setting the stage up for many peoples (generations upon generations) demise!

0 Kudos
221 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

: Interesting take On Socialism

 

Th old guy at the plumbing supply house tried to pull this talking point on me.

 

 

You sound like a socialist.

 

 

I pointed out all the ways he benefited from " socialism " , from the roads his mom and dad used on the way to the hospital on the day he was born, his public education, his job and mine which would not exist without public roads, to his funeral procession to the cemetery.

 

 

Yeah I want all that stuff and more, water, sewer, the electric grid, the roads, the parks, the schools, the hospitals, the Internet, the common defense of the nation, fair and free elections, farm programs.

 

 

Yes I said, I'm a socialist.

 

 

He said, well if you're going to use logic on me ..................

 

 

That's a true story.

 

 

I suggest others do the same.

 

 

Just say yes I'm a socialist, and then point out why.

 

 

Maybe the response will be ( but all that stuff is a government service paid for with taxpayers money , that's not socialism ) 

 

 

However in America that is how the right defines socialism, government services to the people paid for with taxpayer money.

 

 

The real issue is not socialism, the real issue is what the services are, what people they benefit, and who are the people that pays for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regular Social Butterfly


@gruffstuff wrote:

: Interesting take On Socialism

 

Th old guy at the plumbing supply house tried to pull this talking point on me.

 

 

You sound like a socialist.

 

 

I pointed out all the ways he benefited from " socialism " , from the roads his mom and dad used on the way to the hospital on the day he was born, his public education, his job and mine which would not exist without public roads, to his funeral procession to the cemetery.

 

 

Yeah I want all that stuff and more, water, sewer, the electric grid, the roads, the parks, the schools, the hospitals, the Internet, the common defense of the nation, fair and free elections, farm programs.

 

 

Yes I said, I'm a socialist.

 

 

He said, well if you're going to use logic on me ..................

 

 

That's a true story.

 

 

I suggest others do the same.

 

 

Just say yes I'm a socialist, and then point out why.

 

 

Maybe the response will be ( but all that stuff is a government service paid for with taxpayers money , that's not socialism ) 

 

 

However in America that is how the right defines socialism, government services to the people paid for with taxpayer money.

 

 

The real issue is not socialism, the real issue is what the services are, what people they benefit, and who are the people that pays for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


You mean like the lobby industry that has changed the whole American experience of good, functioning capitalism?  You can't reason with those who are just "yes men/women". They are set on the government turning into a communist state of all government control except for the crony-capitalist, no? Anything else they will label...Marxism...and on and on!!

0 Kudos
226 Views
19
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 

NO! IT'S CONSERVATIVES THAT ARE NUTTIER THAN SQUIRREL POOP!
Honored Social Butterfly


@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 

You're right the thought was attributed to the wrong person and that has been corrected. However, the question arises, in discussion which is most important - the thought or who it is attributed to? - or trolling the original poster?


0 Kudos
219 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 

You're right the thought was attributed to the wrong person and that has been corrected.



It wasn't attributed to the wrong person.

 

It NEVER existed.

 

The correction was also a FALSEHOOD for which there has been no recognition by the one who posted it.

NO! IT'S CONSERVATIVES THAT ARE NUTTIER THAN SQUIRREL POOP!
0 Kudos
486 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@nctarheel wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 

You're right the thought was attributed to the wrong person and that has been corrected.



It wasn't attributed to the wrong person.

 

It NEVER existed.

 

The correction was also a FALSEHOOD for which there has been no recognition by the one who posted it.


It existed as was pointed out by the same source that said it wasn't Thomas (snopes).

 

Again you seem less interested in the words and their meaning than you do with "the one who posted it" - not a great discussion technique. It is on a discussion par with "Fascist Red Toad" or something about the Reagan tax cuts or something about racist tRump or something about going to war with Norway or something about David Duke.

 

It seems that focus is a rare commodity around here.

0 Kudos
465 Views
0
Report
Regular Social Butterfly


@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?

0 Kudos
228 Views
14
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@Butterfly565 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?


A good point. Do you suppose all that concern about the original poster rather than the thoughts brought up might be the sort of "baiting" you are thinking of?

0 Kudos
213 Views
13
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@Butterfly565 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?


A good point. Do you suppose all that concern about the original poster rather than the thoughts brought up might be the sort of "baiting" you are thinking of?


The newspaper clipping  in the original post is 73 years old. The idea that nothing has changed in that period of time is ludicrous.  I am not concerned about the original poster but the subject of the thread would seem to be based on a pretty............imaginative theory. 

0 Kudos
213 Views
12
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Butterfly565 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?


A good point. Do you suppose all that concern about the original poster rather than the thoughts brought up might be the sort of "baiting" you are thinking of?


The newspaper clipping  in the original post is 73 years old. The idea that nothing has changed in that period of time is ludicrous.  I am not concerned about the original poster but the subject of the thread would seem to be based on a pretty............imaginative theory. 


Actually, it is made to look old, but from the words (73 years ago) could not be more than two years old.  Since there is no name of the paper, is artificially yellowed and no date, I seriously doubt this ever ran in anywhere but the internet.

0 Kudos
254 Views
3
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@sp362 wrote:


Actually, it is made to look old, but from the words (73 years ago) could not be more than two years old.  Since there is no name of the paper, is artificially yellowed and no date, I seriously doubt this ever ran in anywhere but the internet.


Could well be but Sinclair did express those thoughts way back in the day. So the question becomes, for discussion purposes, which is more important - the ideas or the age of the paper?

0 Kudos
543 Views
2
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


Actually, it is made to look old, but from the words (73 years ago) could not be more than two years old.  Since there is no name of the paper, is artificially yellowed and no date, I seriously doubt this ever ran in anywhere but the internet.


Could well be but Sinclair did express those thoughts way back in the day. So the question becomes, for discussion purposes, which is more important - the ideas or the age of the paper?


Again, you are pushing your false narrative. Sinclair said nothing about liberals or Democrats.  He was pointing out that criticism of "Socialism" has the public believing a lie, so you need to push individual issues and not party platforms.  You are playing (hopefully) dumb again, read my prior replies.  So why did the maker of this meme decide to make it look like something from the 50's, instead of just taking credit for their misleading thoughts?

Honored Social Butterfly


@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


Actually, it is made to look old, but from the words (73 years ago) could not be more than two years old.  Since there is no name of the paper, is artificially yellowed and no date, I seriously doubt this ever ran in anywhere but the internet.


Could well be but Sinclair did express those thoughts way back in the day. So the question becomes, for discussion purposes, which is more important - the ideas or the age of the paper?


Again, you are pushing your false narrative. Sinclair said nothing about liberals or Democrats.  He was pointing out that criticism of "Socialism" has the public believing a lie, so you need to push individual issues and not party platforms.  You are playing (hopefully) dumb again, read my prior replies.  So why did the maker of this meme decide to make it look like something from the 50's, instead of just taking credit for their misleading thoughts?


You're right - he said nothing about the fact that the Dems followed his advise and dodged the word "socialism" until recently.

0 Kudos
512 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Butterfly565 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?


A good point. Do you suppose all that concern about the original poster rather than the thoughts brought up might be the sort of "baiting" you are thinking of?


The newspaper clipping  in the original post is 73 years old. The idea that nothing has changed in that period of time is ludicrous.  I am not concerned about the original poster but the subject of the thread would seem to be based on a pretty............imaginative theory. 


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.

0 Kudos
234 Views
7
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Butterfly565 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?


A good point. Do you suppose all that concern about the original poster rather than the thoughts brought up might be the sort of "baiting" you are thinking of?


The newspaper clipping  in the original post is 73 years old. The idea that nothing has changed in that period of time is ludicrous.  I am not concerned about the original poster but the subject of the thread would seem to be based on a pretty............imaginative theory. 


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.


I could also point out that the "right words" are used to sell our form of capitalism as "perfect capitalism".  You are trying to associate far left Socialist views with the "Liberals" (and/or the Democrat Party).  If you are going to insist they are, then you need to acknowledge the same about far right Fascist views and Conservatives. 

0 Kudos
245 Views
6
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Butterfly565 wrote:

@nctarheel wrote:

Why would one post a totally false comment such as the meme in the original post, be advised by other posters that the post was false (with research confirming its falsehood), and not respond to those who confirmed its falsehood...... at least recognizing that they had made an error by not vetting the original comment?

 


Do you think there is a lot of "baiting" going on?  Daily some of us try to reationalize with the opposing view, but they just report us and take many out of the debate.  That's some debate/constructive conversations tactics, no?


A good point. Do you suppose all that concern about the original poster rather than the thoughts brought up might be the sort of "baiting" you are thinking of?


The newspaper clipping  in the original post is 73 years old. The idea that nothing has changed in that period of time is ludicrous.  I am not concerned about the original poster but the subject of the thread would seem to be based on a pretty............imaginative theory. 


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.


I could also point out that the "right words" are used to sell our form of capitalism as "perfect capitalism".  You are trying to associate far left Socialist views with the "Liberals" (and/or the Democrat Party).  If you are going to insist they are, then you need to acknowledge the same about far right Fascist views and Conservatives. 


I have not seen the term "perfect capitalism" used. Where did you see it?

 

As to "socialists" - don't ask me, ask Bernie.

 

And then a quick hop skip and a jump to an entirely different topic. I am not aware of anything in fascist ideology that equates to Conservatism. In fact, it's quite the opposite - the fascist economic model had the government in charge of the economy - sounds more like a Dem plan - no??

0 Kudos
215 Views
5
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.


I could also point out that the "right words" are used to sell our form of capitalism as "perfect capitalism".  You are trying to associate far left Socialist views with the "Liberals" (and/or the Democrat Party).  If you are going to insist they are, then you need to acknowledge the same about far right Fascist views and Conservatives. 


I have not seen the term "perfect capitalism" used. Where did you see it?

 

As to "socialists" - don't ask me, ask Bernie.

 

And then a quick hop skip and a jump to an entirely different topic. I am not aware of anything in fascist ideology that equates to Conservatism. In fact, it's quite the opposite - the fascist economic model had the government in charge of the economy - sounds more like a Dem plan - no??


We have a "crony capitalism" not true capitalism.  For example (and there others) we do not have either "perect information" or "perfect competition".  (If you don't know what is meant by that, look it up.

As far as your comment about Bernie, somebody else could use the same comment about David Duke and Conservatives.

You don't seem to understand nuance.

I find it hard to believe that you can't see how a far right agenda can be attributed to Conservatives by people wishing to spread disinformation (like you are doing here).

Personally, I think you are simply "playing dumb".

0 Kudos
514 Views
4
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.


I could also point out that the "right words" are used to sell our form of capitalism as "perfect capitalism".  You are trying to associate far left Socialist views with the "Liberals" (and/or the Democrat Party).  If you are going to insist they are, then you need to acknowledge the same about far right Fascist views and Conservatives. 


I have not seen the term "perfect capitalism" used. Where did you see it?

 

As to "socialists" - don't ask me, ask Bernie.

 

And then a quick hop skip and a jump to an entirely different topic. I am not aware of anything in fascist ideology that equates to Conservatism. In fact, it's quite the opposite - the fascist economic model had the government in charge of the economy - sounds more like a Dem plan - no??


We have a "crony capitalism" not true capitalism.  For example (and there others) we do not have either "perect information" or "perfect competition".  (If you don't know what is meant by that, look it up.

As far as your comment about Bernie, somebody else could use the same comment about David Duke and Conservatives.

You don't seem to understand nuance.

I find it hard to believe that you can't see how a far right agenda can be attributed to Conservatives by people wishing to spread disinformation (like you are doing here).

Personally, I think you are simply "playing dumb".


It is true that we have not achieved perfection. After all - we are only human. But we are in a much better place than were we to follow the teachings of Karl Marx.

 

David Duke never said he was a Socialist - Bernie did. So what is your point?

 

As to "nuance" how do you "nuance" David Duke into Conservative ideology??

 

So - where is the disinformation that bothers you?? Is it possibly "information" that you'd rather not think about??

0 Kudos
491 Views
3
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.


I could also point out that the "right words" are used to sell our form of capitalism as "perfect capitalism".  You are trying to associate far left Socialist views with the "Liberals" (and/or the Democrat Party).  If you are going to insist they are, then you need to acknowledge the same about far right Fascist views and Conservatives. 


I have not seen the term "perfect capitalism" used. Where did you see it?

 

As to "socialists" - don't ask me, ask Bernie.

 

And then a quick hop skip and a jump to an entirely different topic. I am not aware of anything in fascist ideology that equates to Conservatism. In fact, it's quite the opposite - the fascist economic model had the government in charge of the economy - sounds more like a Dem plan - no??


We have a "crony capitalism" not true capitalism.  For example (and there others) we do not have either "perect information" or "perfect competition".  (If you don't know what is meant by that, look it up.

As far as your comment about Bernie, somebody else could use the same comment about David Duke and Conservatives.

You don't seem to understand nuance.

I find it hard to believe that you can't see how a far right agenda can be attributed to Conservatives by people wishing to spread disinformation (like you are doing here).

Personally, I think you are simply "playing dumb".


It is true that we have not achieved perfection. After all - we are only human. But we are in a much better place than were we to follow the teachings of Karl Marx.

 

David Duke never said he was a Socialist - Bernie did. So what is your point?

That is the "playing dumb" I was talking about.  I was quite clear in my points.  It is obvious that you are simply to twist this conversation.  You have been wrong about it from your first post, I will not be replying again.

 

As to "nuance" how do you "nuance" David Duke into Conservative ideology??

 

So - where is the disinformation that bothers you?? Is it possibly "information" that you'd rather not think about??


 

0 Kudos
484 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:


Much does change but ideology doesn't and generally neither does the logic offered by Sinclair as to how to "sell" an ideology. For example, a person can espouse the thinking of Marx and complain, "Don't call me a Commie". So that person prefers "social justice" - which term do you think they would be sold by - "Communist" or "social justice warrior"? That was Sinclair's point -using the right words to sell the ideology.


I could also point out that the "right words" are used to sell our form of capitalism as "perfect capitalism".  You are trying to associate far left Socialist views with the "Liberals" (and/or the Democrat Party).  If you are going to insist they are, then you need to acknowledge the same about far right Fascist views and Conservatives. 


I have not seen the term "perfect capitalism" used. Where did you see it?

 

As to "socialists" - don't ask me, ask Bernie.

 

And then a quick hop skip and a jump to an entirely different topic. I am not aware of anything in fascist ideology that equates to Conservatism. In fact, it's quite the opposite - the fascist economic model had the government in charge of the economy - sounds more like a Dem plan - no??


We have a "crony capitalism" not true capitalism.  For example (and there others) we do not have either "perect information" or "perfect competition".  (If you don't know what is meant by that, look it up.

As far as your comment about Bernie, somebody else could use the same comment about David Duke and Conservatives.

You don't seem to understand nuance.

I find it hard to believe that you can't see how a far right agenda can be attributed to Conservatives by people wishing to spread disinformation (like you are doing here).

Personally, I think you are simply "playing dumb".


It is true that we have not achieved perfection. After all - we are only human. But we are in a much better place than were we to follow the teachings of Karl Marx.

 

David Duke never said he was a Socialist - Bernie did. So what is your point?

That is the "playing dumb" I was talking about.  I was quite clear in my points.  It is obvious that you are simply to twist this conversation.  You have been wrong about it from your first post, I will not be replying again.

The only clarity was Bernie calls himself a Socialist - as far as I know Duke does not call himself a Conservative. Also, Bernie is active in politics so his ideology has meaning - Duke is active in hatred and that seems to be his only ideology. As an example, Bernie seems to tend towards using the taxing power for wealth redistribution. As far as I know, Duke has no tax policies.

 

Now, if you'd like to drop out - feel free.

 

As to "nuance" how do you "nuance" David Duke into Conservative ideology??

 

So - where is the disinformation that bothers you?? Is it possibly "information" that you'd rather not think about??


 


 

0 Kudos
452 Views
1
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


We have a "crony capitalism" not true capitalism.  For example (and there others) we do not have either "perect information" or "perfect competition".  (If you don't know what is meant by that, look it up.

As far as your comment about Bernie, somebody else could use the same comment about David Duke and Conservatives.

You don't seem to understand nuance.

I find it hard to believe that you can't see how a far right agenda can be attributed to Conservatives by people wishing to spread disinformation (like you are doing here).

Personally, I think you are simply "playing dumb".


It is true that we have not achieved perfection. After all - we are only human. But we are in a much better place than were we to follow the teachings of Karl Marx.

 

David Duke never said he was a Socialist - Bernie did. So what is your point?

That is the "playing dumb" I was talking about.  I was quite clear in my points.  It is obvious that you are simply to twist this conversation.  You have been wrong about it from your first post, I will not be replying again.

The only clarity was Bernie calls himself a Socialist - as far as I know Duke does not call himself a Conservative. Also, Bernie is active in politics so his ideology has meaning - Duke is active in hatred and that seems to be his only ideology. As an example, Bernie seems to tend towards using the taxing power for wealth redistribution. As far as I know, Duke has no tax policies.

 

Now, if you'd like to drop out - feel free.

 

As to "nuance" how do you "nuance" David Duke into Conservative ideology??

 

So - where is the disinformation that bothers you?? Is it possibly "information" that you'd rather not think about??


 


 


David Duke on Charlottesville: "David Duke, the former KKK grand wizard, is unambiguous about what Saturday’s alt-right and neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, means to him: It’s the fulfillment of President Donald Trump’s vision for America. 

“We are determined to take our country back,” Duke said from the rally, calling it a “turning point.” “We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That’s what we believed in. That’s why we voted for Donald Trump, because he said he’s going to take our country back.”"

His response to Donald Trump:  "I would recommend you take a good look in the mirror & remember it was White Americans who put you in the presidency, not radical leftists."

Does that sound like a radical conservative or a radical liberal? 

If you don't like the Duke reference, there are a myriad of others you could use.  The more you get into populism and white nationalism, the further to the right you are going.

0 Kudos
447 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@gruffstuff wrote:

: Interesting take On Socialism

 

Th old guy at the plumbing supply house tried to pull this talking point on me.

 

 

You sound like a socialist.

 

 

I pointed out all the ways he benefited from " socialism " , from the roads his mom and dad used on the way to the hospital on the day he was born, his public education, his job and mine which would not exist without public roads, to his funeral procession to the cemetery.

 

 

Yeah I want all that stuff and more, water, sewer, the electric grid, the roads, the parks, the schools, the hospitals, the Internet, the common defense of the nation, fair and free elections, farm programs.

 

 

Yes I said, I'm a socialist.

 

 

He said, well if you're going to use logic on me ..................

 

 

That's a true story.

 

 

I suggest others do the same.

 

 

Just say yes I'm a socialist, and then point out why.

 

 

Maybe the response will be ( but all that stuff is a government service paid for with taxpayers money , that's not socialism ) 

 

 

However in America that is how the right defines socialism, government services to the people paid for with taxpayer money.

 

 

The real issue is not socialism, the real issue is what the services are, what people they benefit, and who are the people that pays for them. 

 

 

The distinction is between services good for and free to all vs those that are "means tested". Example - I-75 is available to all, food stamps are not, Obamaphones are not.

 

 

 


 

0 Kudos
225 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@gruffstuff wrote:

: Interesting take On Socialism

 

Th old guy at the plumbing supply house tried to pull this talking point on me.

 

 

You sound like a socialist.

 

 

I pointed out all the ways he benefited from " socialism " , from the roads his mom and dad used on the way to the hospital on the day he was born, his public education, his job and mine which would not exist without public roads, to his funeral procession to the cemetery.

 

 

Yeah I want all that stuff and more, water, sewer, the electric grid, the roads, the parks, the schools, the hospitals, the Internet, the common defense of the nation, fair and free elections, farm programs.

 

 

Yes I said, I'm a socialist.

 

 

He said, well if you're going to use logic on me ..................

 

 

That's a true story.

 

 

I suggest others do the same.

 

 

Just say yes I'm a socialist, and then point out why.

 

 

Maybe the response will be ( but all that stuff is a government service paid for with taxpayers money , that's not socialism ) 

 

 

However in America that is how the right defines socialism, government services to the people paid for with taxpayer money.

 

 

The real issue is not socialism, the real issue is what the services are, what people they benefit, and who are the people that pays for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Yep - Republicans are told Socialism is EVIL and must be resisted at every step, so the poor bots don't realize all the things that the GOPerLords want CUT all benefit the bottom 99%.

 

Want a better life for your kids, a life where their pay gets better as their work gets better (that's what experience does, it makes you MORE PRODUCTIVE), then you must get rid of what's holding them back - the Reagan Tax Scam.

Honored Social Butterfly


@Olderscout66 wrote:

@gruffstuff wrote:

: Interesting take On Socialism

 

Th old guy at the plumbing supply house tried to pull this talking point on me.

 

 

You sound like a socialist.

 

 

I pointed out all the ways he benefited from " socialism " , from the roads his mom and dad used on the way to the hospital on the day he was born, his public education, his job and mine which would not exist without public roads, to his funeral procession to the cemetery.

 

 

Yeah I want all that stuff and more, water, sewer, the electric grid, the roads, the parks, the schools, the hospitals, the Internet, the common defense of the nation, fair and free elections, farm programs.

 

 

Yes I said, I'm a socialist.

 

 

He said, well if you're going to use logic on me ..................

 

 

That's a true story.

 

 

I suggest others do the same.

 

 

Just say yes I'm a socialist, and then point out why.

 

 

Maybe the response will be ( but all that stuff is a government service paid for with taxpayers money , that's not socialism ) 

 

 

However in America that is how the right defines socialism, government services to the people paid for with taxpayer money.

 

 

The real issue is not socialism, the real issue is what the services are, what people they benefit, and who are the people that pays for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Yep - Republicans are told Socialism is EVIL and must be resisted at every step, so the poor bots don't realize all the things that the GOPerLords want CUT all benefit the bottom 99%.

 

Want a better life for your kids, a life where their pay gets better as their work gets better (that's what experience does, it makes you MORE PRODUCTIVE), then you must get rid of what's holding them back - the Reagan Tax Scam.


The same old fraud, "If Harry has to pay more taxes, your employer will pay you more per hour". It just does not make sense. But it is understandable that anyone who believes that would think Marxism is a good thing.

0 Kudos
223 Views
0
Report
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png