Socialism in the US

[Pardalis]

I can't help but wonder, do you bother to stop and even think about what it is that I'm arguing?

You agree with what the Republicans say about Obama, but you don't like the way they say it.

Is this your basic argument?

 

[RandFan]

And round and round we go.

What does the word "gay" mean? Depends on how you use the word "gay", right?

People used to call Bush and Cheney "Neocons", in a pejorative fashion. But they were Neocons nonetheless.

It's not simply the "pejorative fashion" that upsets me. You are cherry picking from my words. Hell, I didn't even use the word "pejorative" in that quote. I said in a dishonest fashion. Right? It's not simply the pejorative fashion. It's the dishonest use of that word. If I call you a liar in order to malign you and it's false then that's not cool.

 

[RandFan]

You agree with what the Republicans say about Obama, but you don't like the way they say it.

Is this your basic argument?

NO NO NO!

Dude, for crying in the dark. Please, for the love of all that is decent. Slow down. Take a deep breath. Consider all that I'm saying.

I don't like the way Republicans use it dishonestly. Misleading. And BTW: They don't all use it in such a fashion. Many are honest and careful to explain what it is they mean by "socialist".

"Well, you know, words have a lot of unintended meanings, and calling people socialists probably goes on the fact that it is true that President Obama's team and the president himself seem to believe that government has a better approach to our economy than does the private sector, and I disagree with that approach," Romney said.

"It is an often-remarked-upon irony that at a time when Europe is moving away from socialism and its many failures, President Obama is moving us toward that direction,"

So long as Republicans are clear about what it is they mean by "socialism" then I'm all for it.

 

[Pardalis]

I'm reading every word you're saying, but it seems you want your cake and eat it to.

You said:

Do you think every usage of a word that isn't the classical one is a misuse of the word?

Doesn't every new usage of a word involve a misuse of a word at some point?

I'm simply noting that words evolve and when they do they stop being a misuse and I think socialism may very well have crossed that line.

How is it that you think words evolve?

Do you understand what "usage" means in the context of etymology and word definitions?

I'm not saying we should. I'm saying we don't get to choose if a particular usage becomes a new definition.

So according to you, even if the Republicans misuse the word, or use it in another way than you do, you are still in agreement as to whether or not Obama is a socialist, because the definition of the word has become so broad that it fits both your definition and the Republican's.

 

[Pardalis]

What does the word "gay" mean? Depends on how you use the word "gay", right?

Yes, "gay" means two different things in two different contexts, sexual orientation and state of mind.

But "socialism" is used in the same context, a political and socio-economic system.

I said in a dishonest fashion. Right? It's not simply the pejorative fashion. It's the dishonest use of that word. If I call you a liar in order to malign you and it's false then that's not cool.

How can it be dishonest when you both agree?

I don't like the way Republicans use it dishonestly. Misleading. And BTW: They don't all use it in such a fashion. Many are honest and careful to explain what it is they mean by "socialist".

So long as Republicans are clear about what it is they mean by "socialism" then I'm all for it.

They seem pretty clear about it, it is your definition that seems a bit unclear.

 

[RandFan]

I'm reading every word you're saying, but it seems you want your cake and eat it to.

No. Absolutely not.

You said:

And I stand by every word.

So according to you, even if the Republicans misuse the word, or use it in another way than you do, you are still in agreement as to whether or not Obama is a socialist...

Ideas. It's the ideas that matter. There is an idea behind the word "theory". If creationists misuse the word it doesn't mean that Dawkins and creatards are in agreement, right?

...because the definition of the word has become so broad that it fits both your definition and the Republican's.

Richard Dawkins shouldn't use the word "theory" because it is so broad it fits the definition of both scientists AND creationists? Really?

• Dawkins uses "theory" in the scientific sense.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
• Creationists uses "theory" in the colloquial sense.
• That creationists use the word "theory" in a misleading way doesn't mean that Dawkins should stop using the word, right?

 

[Pardalis]

Richard Dawkins shouldn't use the word "theory" because it is so broad it fits the definition of both scientists AND creationists? Really?

• Dawkins uses "theory" in the scientific sense.
• Creationists uses "theory" in the colloquial sense.
• That creationists use the word "theory" in a misleading way doesn't mean that Dawkins should stop using the word, right?

Ah, that's a clearer analogy, thank you. I'm understanding your point better.

What would be the difference between your usage of the word "socialist" and the Republican's (the sense)?

 

[RandFan]

Yes, "gay" means two different things in two different contexts, sexual orientation and state of mind.

Then let's substitute "theory" for "gay". Creationists, use it in the context of understanding evolution. Like Republicans their use is misleading.

How can it be dishonest when you both agree?

A.) We don't agree about the meaning. B.) Is it dishonest when Kent Hovind say that evolution is "is just a theory"?

They seem pretty clear about it, it is your definition that seems a bit unclear.

Social democracy. European socialism.

 

[RandFan]

Ah, that's a clearer analogy, thank you. I'm understanding your point better.

Thanks.

What would be the difference between your usage of the word "socialist" and the Republican's (the sense)?

Republicans = Communism, Stalinism, Maoism.
RandFan = Social democracy. European socialism.

 

[Pardalis]

Social democracy. European socialism.

So your definition of "socialism" is "social-democracy"?

These are two different things. If social-democracy was socialism, then it would be called socialism.

 

[RandFan]

So your definition of "socialism" is "social-democracy"?

Not necessarily exactly the same. I'm trying to give you a sense of what I mean.

These are two different things. If social-democracy was socialism, then it would be called socialism.

So, "homosexuality" and "gay" must be different or "gay" would be called "homosexuality"? Also, and to a different point, aren't some words similar to others and thus there is some utility to using the words to help explain each other?

 

[Pardalis]

So, "homosexuality" and "gay" must be different or "gay" would be called "homosexuality"?

Socialism wants the end of capitalism, and wants a full socialist state. Most social-democrats I know (I even vote for them) don't want the end of capitalism, because they recognize that it works. They just want it to be managed better with social regulations.

To me those are two completely different goals.

 

[MG1962]

So your definition of "socialism" is "social-democracy"?

These are two different things. If social-democracy was socialism, then it would be called socialism.

Seriously dude how long are you going to flog this dead horse. You want to stick some pedantic definition of a word even though you know that definition is wrong.

I am still waiting for your response to the claim China can not be a socialist country because it does not fit your definition of socialism. It seems you have reached the point of being so self absorbed that the definition you assign to a word is the only one valid. Even when the rest of the world demonstrably does not agree

 

[Pardalis]

I am still waiting for your response to the claim China can not be a socialist country because it does not fit your definition of socialism.

I don't think it is, since it has adopted a capitalist economy.

 

[RandFan]

Socialism wants the end of capitalism...

But we have established that my definition of socialism in this context doesn't call for the end of capitalism. My definition of the word in this context is Keynesian and or some significant degree of govt regulation. It calls for the end of laisez fair capitalism.

 

[RandFan]

I don't think it is, since it has adopted a capitalist economy.

It has adopted a Keynesian economy. There is a significant difference.

 

[Pardalis]

I think you should use another more precise word then.

 

[MG1962]

I don't think it is, since it has adopted a capitalist economy.

Well according to their constitution they most definitely are a socialist state

From http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/constitution/constitution.html


CHAPTER I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Article 1. The People's Republic of China is a socialist state under the people's democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants. The socialist system is the basic system of the People's Republic of China. Sabotage of the socialist system by any organization or individual is prohibited.

 

[Pardalis]

They should update it.

 

[BenBurch]

As the late Wm. Safire would have told you, words evolve, but we can and SHOULD reject nonsensical redefinition.