That’s true. However, I believe that, as with any political or economic ideology, the number of factors that must be shared by all adherents of said ideology will be extremely limited. Moreover, I am wary of people outside the ideology attempting to dictate which factors should or should not be required for the in-group. For example, I may make the claim that all Democrats must support gun control laws. Apparently, this is not true, so I would be wrong in making this assertion, which is just as unfounded as the claims of some members that all Communists must be willing to dedicate their lives to unskilled labor.
Ultimately, the only ideas that I believe will be universal to all socialists everywhere are the rejection of free market capitalist theory and the necessity of heavy governmental intervention in the national economy.
The short answer is: because I love humanity.
To unpack that a bit: I love humans, and I want to see them flourish in a world that maximizes their net happiness. This maximization requires, first and foremost, that humans are free to live in their various nations without fear of domination by outsiders.
The American Empire is a cancer in this world - one that seeks to thwart human sovereignty at all costs. It prances around the world, raping and pillaging, enslaving peoples and destroying nations, replacing happiness with misery in its path. Without it, the world would be free, and mankind could go about forging its own happiness. A world without the US would not be perfect, but it would certainly be better, happier, freer, and more just.
Ah yes. Without Teh Uber Empire people would be free, to be dominated and enslaved by the tyrants commie supports.
Anybody want to place odds on how much longer this troll will last? I give it about a week or two. I’m sure that he’ll be back later with a new screenname and a different persona. My guess is his next schtick will be trolling as an ultra-fundamentalist Christian or a Looney-left hippie.
Since the latest post above pretty much urinated on the mod instruction, I think your timeline is a bit long, FinnAgain. Plus, I don’t think the juvenile-in-question actually has the skills to do anything other than spout, as I mentioned earlier, other people’s anti-establishment rhetoric. Once banned, he’ll return with a new name but the same game.
Tell me, Commissar, what is your opinion of Adolph Hitler and the Nazis? After all, they were very authoritarian, and they certainly opposed America. If they hadn’t gone to war with your beloved Soviet Union, would you be in their corner?
[Quote=Commissar]
Why would that matter? The beauty of my system is that it specifically disregards mob opinions. We do not need to convince the masses of anything; we simply need to rule and rule well.
[/Quote]
I’m having some trouble understanding what, other than “mob opinion”, would ever enable someone like you to gain power over anything. You’re not exactly the most persuasive person on the block, you know.
No. A centrally-planned economy might just as well be found in a fascist dictatorship with a small economic élite and a large repressed lower class. Socialism requires benefits for the poor. At the minimum.
ETA: By that quote, you demonstrate your complete failure in understanding what socialism is, and once more you reveal yourself as a troll. Epic fail.
There’s also the fact that the Nazis’ administration saw significant centralized control of the German economy. But then again, Commy claims that pack of fascists are an example of democracy.
This is just stupid. There are a number of features that are combined to identify socialism. If you have only the one feature and no others, then you do not have socialism.
No, in this thread, the discussion is a matter of whether you are actually as dumb as you present yourself or whether you are simply trolling. In the other thread regarding your excitable defense of the Libyan plutocrat, you have failed to actually provide a definition of what you believe socialism might be. (You have also failed to provide any actual rebuttals to the citations demonstrating the errors in the claims you have presented.)
You have made the claim; you have not “argued” for any such thing. (Arguing presupposes the presentations of facts and logic). And, frankly, what he might be “in your eyes” is pretty much irrelevant to any discussion beyond a review of your sanity. To actually carry on a conversation, words havfe to have some basis in shared meaning. If you insist on throwing out terms based on your personal idiolect, you are simply babbling to yourself and not actually engaging in discussion.
I have watched his actual behavior over the last 40 years and note that despite his vast oil-based klepto-wealth, he has failed to actually do anything to support “pan-” anything. (Sending some small arms to stir up troubles in countries adjacent to his and funding the murder of people in airplanes does not count as supporting “pan-Africa.”)
Since we’re still in the BBQ Pit and not back in GD, I’ll call this statement from Commissar what it is: Idiotically false.
A centrally planned economy is NOT by itself a sufficient condition for a socialist state. Without certain other political elements, which I need not go into in this forum, a command economy can be used in a number of political systems.
I can imagine a classic republic with a command economy. I can’t imagine a liberal republic such as the USA with one.
I cordially grant Commissar the respect due trollish behavior, and call BOX! BOX! BOX!
This is ridiculous - now the fucking mods are feeding him.
I swear, I will never understand this place if I post here a hundred years. Stuff as obvious as a bowling ball in a bushel basket gets overlooked while they nitpick every jot and tittle to see if it might possibly have some chance in a thousand of not originating from under a bridge, Or else they just make it up as they go along.
It can’t just be stupidity, but I will be rolled in talcum powder and tickled like a baby if I can figure out just exactly what it is.
My opinion of the Third Reich (and Hitler in particular) is exceedingly low, even if we disregard the entire Barbarossa affair.
As I stated previously, in order to have my support, a nation would need to fulfill at least some check-boxes. Being an authoritarian alone is clearly not enough, and apart from this factor, NAZI Germany pretty much violated everything that I believe in. It coddled powerful corporations, it preached imperialism and militancy, it treated humans as expandable resources. Worst of all, it tried to eliminate a not-insignificant portion of its own population, which obviously does nothing for my ultimate goal of maximizing human happiness. In other words, it was essentially the antithesis of everything that I want to see in this world.
Yes, revolution is certainly the most plausible way for proper governments to come to power (and, remember, I have nothing against revolutions, as I consider them to be pure and trustworthy reflections of popular will). Quick coups will also work, as demonstrated by our comrade Gaddafi.
Oh, and I personally have no expectations of participating in such an undertaking. Power appeals to me, to be sure, but I do not believe that I have the charisma necessary to be a top-echelon authoritarian leader. Perhaps a mid-level technical position would be more in keeping with my skills and talents.
No, my friend. What’s “idiotically false” is your confusion of socialism with a political system. It is an ECONOMIC system, my silly little interlocutor, and can be implemented with a huge variety of various political means. You cannot imagine a socialist liberal republic? You may want to do a bit more travelling throughout Northern Europe. :rolleyes:
Let’s see. What other countries have done exactly that? Hmm…USSR, PRC, DPRK, and Libya.
Here’s a cool lesson that my students here learn in English in 9th grade: Actions speak louder than words. Your support of USSR, PRC, DPRK, and Libya are your actions which clearly contradict your spin here.
You finally got one thing right.
Yet, historically it’s always been implemented with just one: violence against the people of the nation the communists/socialists are purporting to save.
You mean those democracies? Man, you really can’t buy this kind of humor.
No you don’t. You want people to be forced into living as you want them, if you really wanted people to maximize their happiness you’d let them choose their own way. You just want power and control, the way to your happiness, not others’.
One theory of mine is he’s trying to develop some sort of character for a story or novel. Bantering here, especially with inanity, would help the writer flesh out the character.
