Full Definition of Socialism
|
3
points
2 is dead wrong. 2 is communism not socialism. Communism is socialism on steroids. Youre of course going to use this description to discredit people who want more socialism in america. But when we say that we mean we want more government spending on education and healthcare. NOT that we want the government to take over private companies and take over all private means of production. That is retarded and that does not work. Stop lumping communism together with socialism they are not the same thing. The second disagreement concerns the way in which society is to exercise its control of property and other resources. In this case the main camps consist of loosely defined groups of centralists and decentralists. On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state—or the state under the guidance of a political party, as was the case in the Soviet Union. Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement 2
points
And you admit it your fucking self. Socialism is one step away from communism. So? Whats your point? Because its close to something bad that means it is bad by default? Battery is one step away from murder but we dont send people charged with battery to life in prison. We already have socialism in the US. We have public education, public sanitation, military, education spending, infrastructure spending, law enforcement, postal service, transportation, ect. ALL of that is socialism. All were advocating for is that CERTAIN industries such as healthcare should recieve more public funding. Thats it. Thats literally it. But your argument is "oh democrats want more healthcare spending? Well soon theyre gonna take over walmart and mcdonalds and soon we will all be in FEMA camps". No that isnt what were fucking advocating. Is Denmark close to communism? Finland? Sweden? Theyve functioned as democratic socialist countries for decades with no indication of taking over their private sectors. One of the first utopian socialists was the French aristocrat Claude-Henri de Saint-Simon. Saint-Simon did not call for public ownership of productive property, but he did advocate public control of property through central planning, in which scientists, industrialists, and engineers would anticipate social needs and direct the energies of society to meet them. Such a system would be more efficient than capitalism, according to Saint-Simon Strange. Most of Europe is under democratic socialism and I don't see people not owning everything they owned BEFORE that. I don't see corporations being taken over by their governments. Your definition is communistic socialism, which is a misnomer, NOT socialism! NO! That is NOT what democrats want, we want a government that works FOR "WE, the PEOPLE, not THEY the ones paying no taxes because THEY made the laws that allow their expensive lawyers to negotiate the loopholes! You can't honestly believe Trump is the "smart one" that "knows how to work the system", it's his MONEY that goes to his lawyers who do the dirty deeds! HE is the one who went bankrupt 5 times, that's how "smart" he is! You Democrats love Europe do you not ! The history of Socialism is scary is it not. “Democratic Socialism,” in which extensive state regulation, with limited state ownership, has been employed by democratically elected governments (as in Sweden and Denmark) in the belief that it produces a fair distribution of income without impairing economic growth. Fair distribution of income now that is what is so enticing to you Democrats. In the belief that is works ? Once again, NO! I do not "love" Europe, I've spent over a year in France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, some of it is nice, some of it is crappy. I love THIS country ... but I realize we can't be "totally proud" of everything about it.
The history of COMMUNISM is scary, the fact that communism USED socialism as a "tool" to convince the people that THEY had a "peoples" government, a "peoples" army, a "peoples" agenda, is scary! What do you really believe about "regulation"?? Do you believe it is there to prevent people from making money?? NO, AGAIN! It is there to protect WE, the PEOPLE!: From: those who would pollute our air and water; those who would produce untested drugs; those who would steal our money through banks; those who would make laws to further THEIR agenda; those who would turn our country into a sectarian state (like Iran, Iraq), those who would take advantage of workers; those who would ignore dangers in the workplace! I could go on and on. Capitalism is a great thing, it made us great. Letting it go unregulated would soon destroy U.S.! We would go back to the oligarch of the Cleveland era where several billionaires fought for control of America and (thankfully), made the mistake of setting Teddy Roosevelt up as Vice President (to keep him as a "puppet"). The assassination of McKinley, though terrible, was likely the thing that saved America! Regulations were made to prevent that from happening again! Now, some people want to give billionaires a second chance to "control" a smaller, more controllable government! Stupid is as stupid does! HIS "goal of socialism is communism", the goal of "Social Democrats" is government that TRULY puts the people first and doesn't give advantages to the FEW (who spend their money to make laws that allow them to live with little possibility of "paying their fair share"!) Trump lost millions .... the laws that money paid for allowed him to "legally" get paid back through our money manipulated tax system! Smaller government THEY know, is easily (and less expensively), controllable! Russia has a "small government"! |
