Trump is over - Chemical Attacks Staged

[o_O.Q]

VGPolyglot said:

coolbeans said:

Fair enough.  I can admit the preceding sentences weren't finely tuned.  You see: this kind of myopic personification bothers me; as though a guy born to vocal socialist parents, continually utilizing similar rhetoric in his writing, etc. can just flip a switch on his political alignments (the Xbox One of European history conveniently!).  That's especially so when you can find quotes from him like this:  "Fascism recognizes the real needs that gave rise to socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or cooperative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State."  (Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions [1935])  

Wait...if the mere existence of a private industry/privatization disputes the notion of one being 'socialist' then what the hell have I been hearing about Scandinavia's socialist utopias since my early teens, despite them hovering around a similar level of economic freedom as the USA?  But now I'm just getting a little facetious.

Not totally, no.  As I previously acknowledged with some of Hitler's actions that'd make a Middle Ages theocrat envious; however, I still consider such a categorization lacking sophistication.

He's saying that he can understand why socialism exists and was gaining popularity, but not necessarily that they were socialist.

As for Scandinavia, that's a common misconception too, as they are social democracies, but not socialist states.

can we get a little clarification on how a socialist state would be formed without a government existing at a hierarchical level above the citizens?

i'm a socialist btw