Those on the right, define "socialism" and "socialist"..

[Virus]

Socialism is state ownership of the means of production and a Socialist is someone who believes in that crap.

 

[dc1971]

Socialism is state ownership of the means of production and a Socialist is someone who believes in that crap.

And Australians believe that anything outside of their little island that is south of the rest of the world is nothing BUT crap!

How about that?

 

[Virus]

Edited by Darat: 

Breach of Rule 0 and Rule 12 removed

 

[Corsair 115]

Socialism is state ownership of the means of production and a Socialist is someone who believes in that crap.

So, using that specific definition, which countries in the West fall into that category?

 

[Virus]

So, using that specific definition, which countries in the West fall into that category?

None.

 

[Chaos]

None.

So you admit that anyone who calls Obama, the Democrats, or for that matter any European country "socialist" is in fact wrong?

 

[Travis]

So, did we ever get a coherent definition?

Let alone from those on the right....did we ever come to a consensus on what socialism is?


I got into the typical "Obama is a socialist" debate with someone at work today.

After a few minutes of talking I suggested we define socialism. I asked him for his definition.

It had quite a few "uhhhhh"s and "they"s in it.

It was something along the lines of, "Uhhhh..when they take your money...and...uh...when they give it to....when they spread it around."

I replied with, "How about a centrally, governmentally, planned economy and centrally, governmentally, system of the creation, distribution, and possible pricing structure of the basic needs of life and a society."

He then said something along the lines of, "That's the problem with people like you." And then he left.

So...how did I do with my definition?

He seems to be operating off the "anyone that doesn't want to get rid of taxes on the rich is a socialist" definition.

That's the only way I can see how Republicans again and again insist that Obama is a socialist.

 

[WildCat]

The purpose of this thread is to end the equivocation of the words "socialism" and "socialist". When you accuse Obama of being a "socialist" or trying to enact "socailism" what do you mean? Are you using the Wikipedia or Dictionary definition of the word? If so can you justify it's usage?

I really don't care how you do it but do it in a a way that is consistent and justifies its use while accusing democrats and liberals of being socialists.

I think that currently the use of the word is purely for propaganda purposes. It provides no real information. It is in fact an equivocation, whether that use is deliberate or not doesn't matter.

So please, step up to the plate. Tell us what your definition of the words are and then justify your use of them to apply to Obama and Democrats?

Premises:

1. The proposition that it's a straw man to argue that those on the right are against any and all social programs has been claimed.
2. The proposition that labeling everyone "socialist" is a lie has been claimed.

Questions:

1. Assuming premise 1 & 2 why is Obama a socialist because he advocates social programs and policies while others who do so are not?
2. Are you against any and all social programs?
3. If you are not, which social programs do you support and why does your support not make you a socialist (if you don't thin Obama is a socialist you can ignore this question)?
4. If advocating social programs makes one a socialist after a given point, at what point is that (how do you draw the line)?

It would help if you knew the definition of socialism, and it's painfully obvious that you don't.

 

[WildCat]

So you admit that anyone who calls Obama, the Democrats, or for that matter any European country "socialist" is in fact wrong?

Yes, have you informed RandFan?

 

[Beerina]

Christian socialists have asserted that early Christian communities, in particular, displayed certain traits, such as the holding of possessions in common,[30] the rejection of conventional sexual mores and gender roles, the provision for communal education, etc., that could be considered similar to socialism.

Interesting, but I would quickly add these are voluntary associations. No libertarian ever denied the power of people grouping together to accomplish things -- indeed, libertarianism presupposed this. It's the voluntary aspect socialist* people disagree with:

"Look! Working together is awesome! Let's seize control and force people to work together and things will be better still!"

History say no.
















* Yey I got to use the hellfire tag!

 

[RandFan]

"Look! Working together is awesome! Let's seize control and force people to work together and things will be better still!"

"Force people to work together"? What does that even mean? Is the military an example of forcing people to work together? How does one entirely separate from society?

History say no.

Really? Are you talking about so called communist regimes like the Soviet Union and Communist China? You do realize that they are not the end all be all of socialism, right?

Why is it there are no shining examples of libertarian societies? Why is it that nations with the highest metrics for GDP and HDI and just about any other metric have some significant degree of govt involved reciprocal altruistic policies?

The truth is that reality is far more complex than you suppose. We are an evolved social species. We are the most successful when we there is a high degree of cooperation. However, we did not evolve to live in such large complex societies. Volunteer cooperation works in small groups but not as much in our modern industrialized communities. The model that best supports the data strongly suggests that a mix of individualism and social services meets our needs best.

When you have your example of a society that meets your ideal or even approaches it please to let us know about it.

Truth is found neither in traditional capitalism nor in classical communism. Each represents a partial truth. Capitalism fails to see the truth in collectivism. Communism fails to see the truth in individualism. Capitalism fails to realize that life is social. Communism fails to realize that life is personal. --Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr

 

[dc1971]

Ok, I used the word 'socialist' in another thread without realizing how polarizing a word it was. Damned to post here I suppose.

Yes. Tell me about it.

SOCIALISM. Such a scary word! It's a word that gives most JREFfers nightmares and hives to even think of it!