Shadow1980 said:
You and I are clearly operating under a different definition of "socialism." Socialism, properly defined, has always means "public ownership of the means of production." It can be by the state seizing private firms, or by the workers directly controlling the means of production through co-ops and similar entities (meaning your local credit union is an example of socialism). But you've made it abundantly clear that you define socialism as "whatever the government does" (a few steps beyond the typical right-wing red-baiting where "socialism" is "whatever specific policies and programs I don't like."). It's clear not just from your comments in this thread, but your comments in other threads. You just plain don't like governments in general, and appear to ascribe to some sort of minarchist or right-libertarian worldview where taxation is theft (which I guess makes the Founding Fathers thieves vis a vis Article One, Section 8 of the Constitution) and that spending those tax dollars on anything is "socialism." It's a worldview that's ironically the flipside of doctrinaire Marxism, wishing for an ideal world that never was and never will be. And I've found that people that ascribe to such views are impossible to argue with because they operate on a wavelength completely alien to more mainstream political viewpoints (not even the Republicans think taxes are theft, and are find with the government spending money on fighter jets, wars of choice, and border walls even if they're against spending on social programs). If you want to live in fear of Stalinist boogeymen hiding behind every bush waiting to oppress you with the "totalitarian horrors" like single-payer health insurance, anti-trust legislation, and having to pay your taxes, be my guest, but I'm done wasting my time trying to convince you that "socialism" doesn't mean "anything the government does." Next time we talk, it'll be about video games. |
"socialism, properly defined, has always means "public ownership of the means of production." It can be by the state seizing private firms..."
like in venezuela(but you don't consider that to be an example of course) or like with the proposal to end private insurance(which even though i posted it multiple times you just flat out ignored)''
"But you've made it abundantly clear that you define socialism as "whatever the government does""
you made this claim in the last post and I replied with a clarification and an example - bernie calling to end private insurance... but why address anything i've actually said when you can just make up a strawman to pretend i haven't proven you wrong
I've said numerous times in the past that I do think there is a need for a pooling of resources in a community to some extent because obviously basic necessities like water are much easier to obtain for everyone if they work collectively
"You just plain don't like governments in general"
lol what a bizarre thing to say
"where taxation is theft (which I guess makes the Founding Fathers thieves vis a vis Article One, Section 8 of the Constitution) and that spending those tax dollars on anything is "socialism.""
your whole post is essentially a repeat of this assertion about 5 times, for one I never said that and secondly the only response I ever get from people like you whenever examples are brought up is
i'll ask again can you give me any example of soclalism since you appear to reject every example i've raised or is it just a myth like the unicorn or the fairy?
and what's wrong with socialism anyway? why are you so scared of being associated with it?
Last edited by o_O.Q - on 27 June 2019
