Forums - Politics Discussion - Is it true that Americans are to this day afraid of socialism?

When Trump said "Democrats want to socialize your Medicare!" and got a big applause in one of his rallies, that shows how brainwashed this country is against the term socialism since non of them caught the irony of that comment. Honestly the majority of the country mostly believes in medicare for all done by the government, but because of how the government is set up it gives enough power to those that don't want it, hence with we don't have it.



Around the Network
FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

I oppose it 1000%. I also oppose a lot of the welfare programs already in our country. As for those saying Americans support socialism, well not really. The truth is most of those are newer Americans (less American) and illegal immigrants or those that exploited loop holes. The vast majority of real Americans still oppose socialism and that was pretty evident when Biden routed Bernie. Bernie even lost support in his home state of Vermont even if add his to Warren's numbers (and she was moving herself closer to center during this campaign as opposed to 2016). So the irony of all of this is that Biden's movement further left might actually help Trump in the end. No idea if that will happen. Before coronavirus I was sure Trump would win, but right now it appears like a Biden landslide. Really too early to tell especially once Trump destroys Biden in debates as I expect.

As for why we oppose socialism? It's garbage and there's plenty of economic theory on why it ruins societies. Frankly I don't support BLM or any of these far left movements. Also, I'm mixed raced and have ancestors that fought in WW2, Civil War, and Revolutionary War. Frankly I'm tired of the anti-American sentiment. It's why I wouldn't even support white Europeans immigrating to our country. Most of us were here to get rid of all the wrongs and degeneracy that takes place in the rest of the world and now it's invading ours. Socialism has been a problem since FDR and it's been made worse since the 1960s. Truly most Americans are against socialism. It never worked and our country was made great generations ago because of the industrial revolution and capitalism from a moral class of people that are not properly represented today. 

The premise of the OP is that many Americans don't understand what it is they're referring to as Socialism and why. Bernie not winning doesn't contradict this claim, as that may partially be a result of what the OP described.
Not sure where you got the idea that "most of them are less American", but poll after poll shows most Americans want single payer healthcare:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2020-polls-national-health-care-plan-favored-by-most-americans-cbs-news-poll-finds/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/03/most-continue-to-say-ensuring-health-care-coverage-is-governments-responsibility/
https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coronavirus-pandemic/

Which seems to be what a lot of people pin socialism to in the US, even though it's just another of the already many socialistic programs you have.
Are you against public schooling? Public roads? Bridges? Libraries? Parks? Fire department? Law enforcement?

These are all funded by the government for everyone to utilize in the same manner as socialized healthcare.

Last edited by Hiku - on 20 July 2020

FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

1). The truth is most of those are newer Americans (less American) and 2). illegal immigrants or those that exploited loop holes.

2). The vast majority of real American...

1). How does being newer to the country make one less American? 

2). You can prove that most of people in the US that want socialism or social programs are illegal immigrants?

3). What is a real American?



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Hiku said:
FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

I oppose it 1000%. I also oppose a lot of the welfare programs already in our country. As for those saying Americans support socialism, well not really. The truth is most of those are newer Americans (less American) and illegal immigrants or those that exploited loop holes. The vast majority of real Americans still oppose socialism and that was pretty evident when Biden routed Bernie. Bernie even lost support in his home state of Vermont even if add his to Warren's numbers (and she was moving herself closer to center during this campaign as opposed to 2016). So the irony of all of this is that Biden's movement further left might actually help Trump in the end. No idea if that will happen. Before coronavirus I was sure Trump would win, but right now it appears like a Biden landslide. Really too early to tell especially once Trump destroys Biden in debates as I expect.

As for why we oppose socialism? It's garbage and there's plenty of economic theory on why it ruins societies. Frankly I don't support BLM or any of these far left movements. Also, I'm mixed raced and have ancestors that fought in WW2, Civil War, and Revolutionary War. Frankly I'm tired of the anti-American sentiment. It's why I wouldn't even support white Europeans immigrating to our country. Most of us were here to get rid of all the wrongs and degeneracy that takes place in the rest of the world and now it's invading ours. Socialism has been a problem since FDR and it's been made worse since the 1960s. Truly most Americans are against socialism. It never worked and our country was made great generations ago because of the industrial revolution and capitalism from a moral class of people that are not properly represented today. 

The premise of the OP is that many Americans don't understand what it is they're referring to as Socialism and why. Bernie not winning doesn't contradict this claim, as that may partially be a result of what the OP described.
Not sure where you got the idea that "most of them are less American", but poll after poll shows most Americans want single payer healthcare:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2020-polls-national-health-care-plan-favored-by-most-americans-cbs-news-poll-finds/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/03/most-continue-to-say-ensuring-health-care-coverage-is-governments-responsibility/
https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coronavirus-pandemic/

Which seems to be what a lot of people pin socialism to in the US, even though it's just another of the already many socialistic programs you have.
Are you against public schooling? Public roads? Bridges? Libraries? Parks? Fire department? Law enforcement?

These are all funded by the government for everyone to utilize in the same manner as socialized healthcare.

Let's make this clear while I oppose many socialized programs in America, I never said I oppose all of them. Everything you listed existed under capitalism and were around before most of the social programs introduced in the last 100 years that I take issue with. Even still I can find some room for disagreement.

I support public schooling in a different timeline, but I have many complaints with its current implementation. Common core has been a disaster and American education system uses tax payer dollars at a terrible lack of efficiency. I'm not sending my children to public school if I can afford it, and I consider it robbery that I will still have to pay taxes for it. I think people who send their children to private schools, Catholic schools, or charters should be tax credited and face no penalty. I strongly support choice. 

I completely support maintenance for public roads and bridges, but I'm against many laws in place which allow for government to steal farmers land, be forced to sell and move from their house. We should be maintaining older infrastructure and replacing it, but instead we are forced to constantly expand these roads or add new ones because of traffic. And yes, this is an either or scenario due to costs.

On top of that, a lot of the reason we still need increases are because of the growth in population which is almost entirely from immigration. Not only due to illegal immigration not properly being enforced, but also the 1965 immigration act which was passed under false pretenses. Not only did people such as Ted Kennedy claim this would not change American ideological or racial demographics, but it was also created by lobbyists who were never elected to public office. In any case you polling random people only proves my point about the new Americans not having respect for this country like older immigrants did. Italians and Irish were not white, but they assimilated with only subversives from mafia being the outliers. Worth noting that Pelosi's family has ties to mafia Italians aka the worst of the worst anti-American Italians. I myself am part Italian btw and my pro-American ancestors hated the mafia.

While I do support infrastructure maintenance and would support several trillion $ worth of projects, I only support it in tandem with changes to immigration and ending the attacks on farmers stealing their land. I'm also not in support of foreign nationals, dual citizens, or bankers to buy land en masse so I support government regulation in that regard. 

Parks are iffy. I see many private parks that are taken care of far better than my local state park. I regularly go to botanical gardens, parks, and estates. Especially back when I was working in a garden center. I don't have a strong opinion on this. 

Fire department and police? So if I say yes, I am a socialist for such things and yesterday if I say yes I was a white supremacy. 🥴

As for public healthcare, well I've read several very personal explanations by doctors on why it is harmful to the practice. My uncle who is a retired doctor is against it. I've also heard it explained by economists and agreed with their reasoning but I'm not capable of explaining it in brevity. I think it would healthcare more expensive and worse, which is what Obamacare did at a smaller scale than what a more comprehensive socialist program would do. 

I also support some regulations on big tech, retail monopolies, and bank usury. Does that make me a socialist? No. I don't support UBI or public healthcare which are totally anti-American at their core. 

I'm surprised you didn't bring up COVID stimulus which is the most obvious form of socialism in recent memory. Although it is an emergency fund and not the same as a standard national program in daily life. 

Bottom line, show me a socialist plan that includes reducing taxes and I will consider it, but right now American taxation is already high enough and the government systems prove time and time again they are incompetent at the foundational levels and corrupt at the highest when they see an opportunity. I'm not an anarcho-capitalist who believes all social programs are bad, but I do see socialism as dangerous because it is. The exact opposite of what you are saying is true. Our education system teaches things poorly to about what America stands for. It still preaches people like Joe McCarthy as a villain and says his red scare was wrong when it was completely right and vindicated. The original reason for the scare after all was things like MK Ultra (led by communist infiltrators in the CIA) and Russian agents stealing nuclear secrets (happened). Our government is already HUGE, way bigger than it should be. Anyone who suggests we need more rather than actual fixes to the system itself are just asking for problems. I absolutely consider Americans who support socialism less American and in almost all cases they are. Who are the one's destroying statues? Not socialists? Actually yes, BLM has many self described socialists and even terrorists at the top of its chain of command. 



FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:
Hiku said:

The premise of the OP is that many Americans don't understand what it is they're referring to as Socialism and why. Bernie not winning doesn't contradict this claim, as that may partially be a result of what the OP described.
Not sure where you got the idea that "most of them are less American", but poll after poll shows most Americans want single payer healthcare:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2020-polls-national-health-care-plan-favored-by-most-americans-cbs-news-poll-finds/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/03/most-continue-to-say-ensuring-health-care-coverage-is-governments-responsibility/
https://morningconsult.com/2020/04/01/medicare-for-all-coronavirus-pandemic/

Which seems to be what a lot of people pin socialism to in the US, even though it's just another of the already many socialistic programs you have.
Are you against public schooling? Public roads? Bridges? Libraries? Parks? Fire department? Law enforcement?

These are all funded by the government for everyone to utilize in the same manner as socialized healthcare.

Let's make this clear while I oppose many socialized programs in America, I never said I oppose all of them. Everything you listed existed under capitalism and were around before most of the social programs introduced in the last 100 years that I take issue with. Even still I can find some room for disagreement.

Well so is socialized healthcare in every developed nation that's also capitalistic.

Having issues with how some things like public education is implemented is understandable. The question is if you're against children who cannot afford private education to also get one. People who can't afford the fire department to have their house fire extinguished, etc.
Doesn't sound like you are, so moving on.

FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

Fire department and police? So if I say yes, I am a socialist for such things 

Well that's up to you guys who call universal healthcare socialism. Because that's not how other countries label it, and it's not a controversial issue either.
So if you call someone who wants universal healthcare a socialist, then someone who is ok with driving on public roads funded by tax payers, or rely on law enforcement, fire department, public schooling, etc should be a socialist as well?
Or is there something specifically unique to this one program on top of everything else that would suddenly change everything?

If so, can you demonstrate this by pinpointing it in the healthcare of Japan, Canada, Australia, Norway, Spain, Germany, U.K., etc?
(Other capitalistic developed nations.)

FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

As for public healthcare, well I've read several very personal explanations by doctors on why it is harmful to the practice. My uncle who is a retired doctor is against it. I've also heard it explained by economists and agreed with their reasoning but I'm not capable of explaining it in brevity. I think it would healthcare more expensive and worse, which is what Obamacare did at a smaller scale than what a more comprehensive socialist program would do.

Well a couple of things. There's nothing worse than not being able to afford healthcare at all. Only in USA (talking about developed nations) do people have to make a choice between paying $2500 for an ambulance ride (free in other countries) or risking getting to the hospital too late by going by taxi instead. Which sadly has had fatal outcomes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kll-yYQwmuM

You can watch this clip, or not, of U.K. residents reacting to healthcare costs in the US. But it illustrates how the rest of the world reacts when they hear about USA's insane healthcare costs.

Your drug and healthcare expenses keep skyrocketing year after year, to the point where you have insurance companies that actually pay people $500 to fly to another country to pick up their drugs there, because it saves them money. Sounds insane but it's true: https://youtu.be/7Z2XRg3dy9k?t=442
This is why people want to drive to Canada to buy the same drugs, because it's cheaper. Even when that drug is manufactured in USA and shipped to Canada, it can still cheaper to drive there.

The reason for why drug prices keep going up in the US is because unlike every other developed nation on Earth, USA is the only one where the government can't negotiate drug prices. The US based drug manufacturers are unable to price gouge Canada in the same way, so they have to sell the drugs to them at a reasonable price.

Now about making healthcare worse.
The only thing that really changes with universal healthcare is who pays for it. Every country has their own version of it though. The pharmaceutical industry being unable price gouge (which is the first thing that needs to change) stands to lose a lot of money on this. Here's a former health insurance executive admitting to how they spent a lot of $$ to propagate the lie that Canada's healthcare system is worse, etc.

A friend of mine who is a doctor working in the US told me the worst part about his job is dealing with insurance companies. That's not something doctors elsewhere have to do.

Personal story: I had to go to the E.R. one day, and after about 5 mins a nurse called my name and I followed them to be examined. Afterwards he said a surgeon needed to check on me in case it was urgent and I needed surgery right away, so I waited an additional 20 mins for one to show up. (And the surgeon happened to be an old classmate of mine, who I know was a top student.) He determined that there was nothing urgent with my situation, and then I had to wait for another doctor, which then took another 3-4 hours. But I was in no hurry at that point.

They determined I needed a cat scan, which I would get on Monday (I arrived at the E.R. Friday night) so I had to stay there over the weekend while they ran blood tests on me every day. Got my own room with a nice view, had a TV so I could watch the Wold Cup, and I got 3 meals a day. Turns out it wasn't anything serious, and after all was said and done, I left the hospital and they said they'd send me a bill for all of it.
I received the bill a few weeks later. It was a grand total of $30.
It costs me a lot more to pay rent and eat for 3-4 days at home.

We do pay more taxes than USA though (Sort of. You guys have added taxes to products you buy.) but when it comes to important things like healthcare, people think it's worth it. In the US you can for example fund this by not giving billionaires huge tax breaks.
And USA is already spending more on healthcare per capita than other developed nations, while getting a lot less for it.

Last edited by Hiku - on 20 July 2020

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

1). The truth is most of those are newer Americans (less American) and 2). illegal immigrants or those that exploited loop holes.

2). The vast majority of real American...

1). How does being newer to the country make one less American? 

2). You can prove that most of people in the US that want socialism or social programs are illegal immigrants?

3). What is a real American?

It is not a universal case on an individual level so it doesn't speak to some anecdote friends we might have in our personal lives, but rather one that accurately describes the generations on general or scientific terms. Ideological transformation has actually always been a problem with any mass migration to this country which is why almost all our immigration policies prior to the 1965 immigration act were extremely strict even with Europeans and often factored in ideology and job capabilities when allowing people to come to this country. The 1930s were met with some backlash which is why Republicans in the 1940s passed an immigration moratorium and several clarifications on citizenship. The Nationality Act of 1940 would suggest that dual citizens should not be in our country and in fact lose citizenship, yet there are tons of them maintain influence in congress today (mostly dual citizens from Israel). Until 1990 there was plenty of official policy that allowed for the US to reject people who supported anarchism or socialism and other left wing beliefs. It wasn't a perfect system and enforcement varied greatly, but it definitely represented an American consciousness against these ideas. The 1965 immigration act was also passed under false promises, that we would see no demographic transformation on both the basis of race and ideology. 

The truth there is an ideological divide between those who decent from older generations of Americans and those from newer generations the latter who often produce children that are often far more left wing than themselves at higher rates than the overall population. This is in part due to our education system pitting them against American ideas through cultural marxism. Legal immigration numbers have sky-rocketed to levels that take no effort to explain as to how or why they are problematic and subversive to the American worker. Also, worth noting the same people who want socialism are the same people that claim every older American hero was racist and needs to be cancelled. The one's violently protesting against our government should be considered traitors which is how they would have been treated 100 or 200 years ago and how the Nationality Act of 1940 claimed that they should lose citizenship. It's obvious that corrupt politicians only support open borders because it creates a voting block which is why many of the long term democrats that have been in power actually flip flopped on the issue. I support repatriation efforts which might sound like a fancy word for deportation, but it's the most logical evolution of the American consciousness and one that is more ethical than the stages that led to the current state of American politics. At the very least we should implement an immigration moratorium as we have several times in our country's past. Socialism has no place in America and is in fact itself anti-American. America has a socialist and social marxist problem. 

While some regulations and policies that I support might seem socialistic I am ultimately in favor of private property and there's no limit to problems with normalizing socialism as acceptable or benevolent. Of course capitalism needs some regulations especially with bank usury, monopolies, and newer technology being neglected currently. I also ultimately believe a system is only part of what creates a good society and that ultimately the moral principles of its people are also important. A national healthcare system wouldn't be a horrible act to transform our country, but it would create some problems and make our system worse. However, this thread was based on the wider notion of socialism. Socialism itself is based on resentment and misjudgment of human conditions at its philosophical origin.

Even the OP of this thread the conversation was set forth with a framing that calls into question the level of "good faith" in this discussion. It's not an irrational fear at all to oppose socialism, but an intuitive American consciousness. Also, if anything our current education system does a terrible job at educating Americans about its evils; rather it intentionally subverts it which is why more and more people support it. Social marxism and infiltration have been a problem for decades and these aren't conspiracy theories as almost everyone on the right can at least provide some examples let alone actual factors like affirmative action, FDR allowing foreign communists into our Ivy League colleges through his own affirmative action, and tons of policies that are systematically anti-American in nature (such as education programs that only target minorities or immigrants). Everyone should understand the slippery slope of socialism is real and socialist nations have no doubt led to highest levels of displacement through immigration, slavery and police states, dystopia dysfunction, and mass starvation in every form and compared to every ideology. Socialism has been worse than all of white supremacy, fascism, and religious oppression combined which I agree had many problems in their own cases. Socialism (and communism) are the deadliest and ugliest ideology in human history that have led to the highest levels of suffering. That is why we "fear" socialism.   

Conversely American capitalism/industrialization almost immediately lowered poverty to historical record bests, created decades of generational wealth, countless foundational inventions, and towards the tail end of the industrialization boom America was the tallest nation on the planet. Its global influence led to global record bests in lowering poverty and starvation. Meanwhile a lot of globalist policies today are actually destabilizing the third world, reopening slave trade, used for trafficking, and flooding the first world with the third world and creating long term problems. Don't get me wrong the neocon Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats. Interestingly neoconservatism was originally penned by so called defectors of communism. It's almost like choosing between Mensheviks (neocons) and Bolskeviks (democrats). Of course they don't like each other, but both hate the actual nation (Americans) more than each other. Hence the constant gaslighting against Americans. We need to see a capitalist revival and repatriation of anti-Americans in this country if we want to get the best version of America.



Hiku said:
FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

Let's make this clear while I oppose many socialized programs in America, I never said I oppose all of them. Everything you listed existed under capitalism and were around before most of the social programs introduced in the last 100 years that I take issue with. Even still I can find some room for disagreement.

Well so is socialized healthcare in every developed nation that's also capitalistic.

Having issues with how some things like public education is implemented is understandable. The question is if you're against children who cannot afford private education to also get one. People who can't afford the fire department to have their house fire extinguished, etc.
Doesn't sound like you are, so moving on.

FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

Fire department and police? So if I say yes, I am a socialist for such things 

Well that's up to you guys who call universal healthcare socialism. Because that's not how other countries label it, and it's not a controversial issue either.
So if you call someone who wants universal healthcare a socialist, then someone who is ok with driving on public roads funded by tax payers, or rely on law enforcement, fire department, public schooling, etc should be a socialist as well?
Or is there something specifically unique to this one program on top of everything else that would suddenly change everything?

If so, can you demonstrate this by pinpointing it in the healthcare of Japan, Canada, Australia, Norway, Spain, Germany, U.K., etc?
(Other capitalistic developed nations.)

FormerlyTeamSilent13 said:

As for public healthcare, well I've read several very personal explanations by doctors on why it is harmful to the practice. My uncle who is a retired doctor is against it. I've also heard it explained by economists and agreed with their reasoning but I'm not capable of explaining it in brevity. I think it would healthcare more expensive and worse, which is what Obamacare did at a smaller scale than what a more comprehensive socialist program would do.

Well a couple of things. There's nothing worse than not being able to afford healthcare at all. Only in USA (talking about developed nations) do people have to make a choice between paying $2500 for an ambulance ride (free in other countries) or risking getting to the hospital too late by going by taxi instead. Which sadly has had fatal outcomes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kll-yYQwmuM

You can watch this clip, or not, of U.K. residents reacting to healthcare costs in the US. But it illustrates how the rest of the world reacts when they hear about USA's insane healthcare costs.

Your drug and healthcare expenses keep skyrocketing year after year, to the point where you have insurance companies that actually pay people $500 to fly to another country to pick up their drugs there, because it saves them money. Sounds insane but it's true: https://youtu.be/7Z2XRg3dy9k?t=442
This is why people want to drive to Canada to buy the same drugs, because it's cheaper. Even when that drug is manufactured in USA and shipped to Canada, it can still cheaper to drive there.

The reason for why drug prices keep going up in the US is because unlike every other developed nation on Earth, USA is the only one where the government can't negotiate drug prices. The US based drug manufacturers are unable to price gouge Canada in the same way, so they have to sell the drugs to them at a reasonable price.

Now about making healthcare worse.
The only thing that really changes with universal healthcare is who pays for it. Every country has their own version of it though. The pharmaceutical industry being unable price gouge (which is the first thing that needs to change) stands to lose a lot of money on this. Here's a former health insurance executive admitting to how they spent a lot of $$ to propagate the lie that Canada's healthcare system is worse, etc.

A friend of mine who is a doctor working in the US told me the worst part about his job is dealing with insurance companies. That's not something doctors elsewhere have to do.

Personal story: I had to go to the E.R. one day, and after about 5 mins a nurse called my name and I followed them to be examined. Afterwards he said a surgeon needed to check on me in case it was urgent and I needed surgery right away, so I waited an additional 20 mins for one to show up. (And the surgeon happened to be an old classmate of mine, who I know was a top student.) He determined that there was nothing urgent with my situation, and then I had to wait for another doctor, which then took another 3-4 hours. But I was in no hurry at that point.

They determined I needed a cat scan, which I would get on Monday (I arrived at the E.R. Friday night) so I had to stay there over the weekend while they ran blood tests on me every day. Got my own room with a nice view, had a TV so I could watch the Wold Cup, and I got 3 meals a day. Turns out it wasn't anything serious, and after all was said and done, I left the hospital and they said they'd send me a bill for all of it.
I received the bill a few weeks later. It was a grand total of $30.
It costs me a lot more to pay rent and eat for 3-4 days at home.

We do pay more taxes than USA though (Sort of. You guys have added taxes to products you buy.) but when it comes to important things like healthcare, people think it's worth it. In the US you can for example fund this by not giving billionaires huge tax breaks.
And USA is already spending more on healthcare per capita than other developed nations, while getting a lot less for it.

I would suggest you look at negative tax and coupon system from very liberal austriac school. It doesn't do statization of anything, doesn't go for the socialism ideals on these but also allow that poor people have access to education and health. Much better system than things like Brazilian univeral healthcare and public education.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:

I would suggest you look at negative tax and coupon system from very liberal austriac school. It doesn't do statization of anything, doesn't go for the socialism ideals on these but also allow that poor people have access to education and health. Much better system than things like Brazilian univeral healthcare and public education.

I'll have a look. I just think that USA's system is inhumane, and there needs to be some system that guarantees it *channels Bernie voice* "as a yuuuman right" to every citizen.



JRPGfan said:
Nautilus said:
Who isn't afraid of socialism?

Its a facism regime that killed hundreds of millions of people. Everyone should be very afraid of it.

*facepalm*

Nazi germany wasnt socialism though....

You know how when you want to sell something bad, as something good to fool people? you find a innocnent name for it?
National socialism (nazism) is just that. It had nothing to do with socialism, so you cannot call it socialism, without being dishonest about things.

Since you dont know what socalism or facism is:

Facism:

"a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition"
+
"a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control "

Nationalism, is basically patriotism. Differnt worlds, more or less same meaning.
A Regim that puts nation & race, above the individuals.

Who runs his Presidency campagne on "america first!" ?
uses racism, patriotism..., won by mainly getting just the "white" vote?



"a dictatorial leader, severe economic and regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition"

""a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control"

Trump is all about all about Autocracy (authority or rule of the president, one person possesses near unlimited power (unchecked power))
He wishes he had unlimited power, and is working his way to towards it.


Typically alot of these autocrats, and facists, attack journalists, because their "truth" is the only one the public needs to hear.
Remember "Fake news!" ? Seeing the police attacking journalist, during the protests, actively targeting them?

Trump is friends with white power groups.

Atleast back when he ran in 2016.
People in his campagne, were people with ties to white power groups.
Hes since distanced himself from them...

But then theres the tale of his ex-wife, saying he slept with a book on hilter, and his speeches by his bedside.
(and loved to read the speeches before going to sleep)


"....and forcible suppression of opposition"

Remeber when he chanted "lock her up" about his political oppenent? And Trump followers gladly followed his lead?
He asked for russia to hack her emails on live tv, hopeing the russians got dirt on her.
He asked Ukraine on intel on Joe Biden...

Trump isn't far from facism, autocracy, nazism.

"Its a facism regime that killed hundreds of millions of people. Everyone should be very afraid of it."

Then you should take note, when people say, they see the current president heading down the rabbit hole, of being a facist.
Germany just like trump supporters, didnt see the danger, until it was too late.

Who said anything about Nazism?

I am talking here about the Soviet Union, Cuba, China, etc.

All of them have carachteristics of facist regime, even if they implement it under the guise of a socialist/communist regime. Everything you just described was used by these socialist regimes as tools to control the population and stay in power. 

"a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual" - Check.(especially for the USSR)

"that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader" - Check.(Raul Castro, Fidel Castro, Stalin, etc) Leaders were appointed by the government, and weren't even elected in any capacity, *cough* in opposition to your ridiculous Trump comparison *cough*

"severe economic and regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition" - Check. I mean, The Wall of Berlin. I don't think anything else needs to be said.

I mean, I know you guys don't like Trump and all, and I do agree that he says some stupid things here and there, but saying that his government is almost akin to a facist ragime? I don't think that even normal people would say that about Biden just out of spite. You guys really need to get your heads out of your asses. Go talk to someone who really lived through hell in these regimes( like people who lived in the USSR or are living in Bolivia right now for example) and be glad that the US allows you to have the freedom and democracy that it gives, and that yes, Trump has maintained.

Last edited by Nautilus - on 20 July 2020

My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Hiku said:
DonFerrari said:

I would suggest you look at negative tax and coupon system from very liberal austriac school. It doesn't do statization of anything, doesn't go for the socialism ideals on these but also allow that poor people have access to education and health. Much better system than things like Brazilian univeral healthcare and public education.

I'll have a look. I just think that USA's system is inhumane, and there needs to be some system that guarantees it *channels Bernie voice* "as a yuuuman right" to every citizen.

Governments are inherintanly inneficient and giving stuff for free usually is underappreciated and inflated demand, so it usually makes for a lot of waste money. With tickets government keep only the very basic national sovereign, judicial system and infraestructure. School and Health aren't managed by government, they basically transfer some sort of wealth (coupons) but the hospitals and schools are private and people can choose where they want to use so that can improve competition among schools. Of course that also need to very well defined to avoid entering the problems of guaranteed money to universities inflating prices and similar for the health cost in USA.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994