Juliar betrays australia, destroys our economic future (1 Viewer)

[scuba_steve2121]

You don't even know what your arguing. You went in with this lazy idea that you could just attack perceived flaws in social democracy and that would somehow justify calling it communism, that as exposed for the fallacious, lazy argument that it was and now your just spinning like a top, not going anywhere.

social democracy leads to growth in government that in time resembles something of a socialist/ fascist state

that is what I argue

that is why I call a social democrat a socialist because what they believe in sets precedents to allow big government and no freedom

you're an idiot if you believe the government won't keep growing until it collapses 1989 style

 

[scuba_steve2121]

maybe just maybe they won't grow and they will realise how stupid they have been and will cut welfare, other programs and taxes, but given the current political discourse that is a pipe dream

 

[funkshen]

the unmistakable march towards australian federal government state socialism (with coalition governments leading the way)

 

[peikoff]

You don't even know what your arguing. You went in with this lazy idea that you could just attack perceived flaws in social democracy and that would somehow justify calling it communism, that as exposed for the fallacious, lazy argument that it was and now your just spinning like a top, not going anywhere.

^This

perfect analysis

 

[Lentern]

social democracy leads to growth in government that in time resembles something of a socialist/ fascist state

that is what I argue

that is why I call a social democrat a socialist because what they believe in sets precedents to allow big government and no freedom

you're an idiot if you believe the government won't keep growing until it collapses 1989 style

Socialism is fine, socialism is perfectly compatible with peaceful and democratic values. Communism is not.

 

[scuba_steve2121]

Socialism is fine, socialism is perfectly compatible with peaceful and democratic values. Communism is not.

explain the difference in your view between socialism and communism before we go any further

 

[funkshen]

meanwhile, pacific free trade zone.

socialism is far more violent than communism. at least, socialism through redistributive justice is, as it is necessarily violent. communism is far more peaceful and democratic because workers will voluntarily produce common goods.

 

[cosmo kramer]

lol only funkshen actually knows what communism means

also hilarious graphs

ROAD TO SURF DOME

 

[scuba_steve2121]

meanwhile, pacific free trade zone.

socialism is far more violent than communism. at least, socialism through redistributive justice is, as it is necessarily violent. communism is far more peaceful and democratic because workers will voluntarily produce common goods.

everybody has their own idea of what the difference between communism and socialism is

some people think there is a huge difference others think they are just interchnagable words

I as yet have not come to a good definition yet, so I just prefer to use the term socialism to stand for the government owning the means of production (that includes people) and in the process destroying freedom

 

[funkshen]

you can't define the system through its consequences m8, although it is of course right to point them out.

the whole point is that it is a debate. (almost) everyone comes at it with different axioms. you don't have to be a marxist to be a socialist etc etc. so it really is quite absurd to talk about such things in abstract terms.

its like people who say Christianity is by definition a religion of peace. totally irrelevant (see: crusades, european wars of religion, taiping rebellion etc)

 

[scuba_steve2121]

you can't define the system through its consequences m8, although it is of course right to point them out

I look at the outcomes not the intentions. if we only ever thought about intentions we would of fucked ourselves long ago

 

[Lentern]

explain the difference in your view between socialism and communism before we go any further

Socialism is an exclusively economic system like capitalism, it merely refers to a system whereby a central government assumes possession of capital before redistributing it directly and indirectly in an egalitarian way. Communism is a whole system of government encompassing, it is completely incompatible with democracy as nearly all the literature, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao etc insist that power is obtained through the proletariat rising up against the incumbent government and re-arranging society as a dictatorship of the proletariat, atleast for some time anyway. Anyone who claims to be both a communist and a pacifist is either a liar or a fool, it cannot be done likewise any "communist party" that contests a democratic election and who seriously has no ambitions to form government beyond the democratic process is similarly naive. The doctrines simply do not allow it. Socialism might be a fairly integral party of communism, but socialism can occur completely independent of it.

 

[cosmo kramer]

i think we're playing a bit of a semantic game here

when people refer to "communism" they usually arent referring to the theoretical state of society postulated by marx to be the DENOUEMENT OF ALL HISTORY AND THE DIALECTIC but the kind of socialist regimes set up in the 20th century that (putatively) were trying to bring this state of society about

 

[funkshen]

I look at the outcomes not the intentions. if we only ever thought about intentions we would of fucked ourselves long ago

yeah but defining an abstraction by its consequence is a case of the tail wagging the dog.

also what cosmo said. you are not defining socialism, you are defining and inferring from "examples of socialism."

 

[scuba_steve2121]

Socialism is an exclusively economic system like capitalism, it merely refers to a system whereby a central government assumes possession of capital before redistributing it directly and indirectly in an egalitarian way. Communism is a whole system of government encompassing, it is completely incompatible with democracy as nearly all the literature, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao etc insist that power is obtained through the proletariat rising up against the incumbent government and re-arranging society as a dictatorship of the proletariat, atleast for some time anyway. Anyone who claims to be both a communist and a pacifist is either a liar or a fool, it cannot be done likewise any "communist party" that contests a democratic election and who seriously has no ambitions to form government beyond the democratic process is similarly naive. The doctrines simply do not allow it. Socialism might be a fairly integral party of communism, but socialism can occur completely independent of it.

oh ok, so in your view its about how it occurs fair enough

 

[scuba_steve2121]

i think we're playing a bit of a semantic game here

when people refer to "communism" they usually arent referring to the theoretical state of society postulated by marx to be the DENOUEMENT OF ALL HISTORY AND THE DIALECTIC but the kind of socialist regimes set up in the 20th century that (putatively) were trying to bring this state of society about

yea this ^

 

[Lentern]

oh ok, so in your view its about how it occurs fair enough

And how it maintains it, a communist party can't really seize government in a marxist coup but then begin to transition to democratic elections and still be communist.

 

[Lentern]

i think we're playing a bit of a semantic game here

when people refer to "communism" they usually arent referring to the theoretical state of society postulated by marx to be the DENOUEMENT OF ALL HISTORY AND THE DIALECTIC but the kind of socialist regimes set up in the 20th century that (putatively) were trying to bring this state of society about

The right will because they know the legacy of Mao's cultural revolution and the Stalinist purges mean that communism evokes distasteful connotations of brutal dictatorships. Except for a few idiot sociology students at universities nobody from the left will ever refer to themselves as a communist.

 

[scuba_steve2121]

The right will because they know the legacy of Mao's cultural revolution and the Stalinist purges mean that communism evokes distasteful connotations of brutal dictatorships. Except for a few idiot sociology students at universities nobody from the left will ever refer to themselves as a communist.

they prefer the term environmentalists these days XD

 

[funkshen]

cosmo's cultural revolution