Socialism :

[Talon]

Is it really all bad?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

"Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production,^[7] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.^[8] Social ownership may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.^[9] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,^[10] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms."

[TheRabbit]

More worrying about other peoples shit. You are a pathetic loser. That's why you are alone.

[Mayaca]

Not at all. If you want to discuss theoretical socialism, it is a decent system of government that looks out for the good of the many.


But the reality of it put in to practice is that it is used as a path to an oligarchy, and is used by tyrants to pretend to be helping people while creating a system where there is a higher ruling class and a subordinate servant class.

*****But most systems of government all become the same once the reach a certain size and complexity. There is no "republic" or democracy, or even communist regime at the size of a major country. They all become blends of many types of processes.

We live in a country that is a combination of representative republic with socialism and totalitarianism woven through it.

[Unclefred]

Some mushrooms are poisonous. Some delicious. There is no either/or.

[Talon]

What are you talking about? I've always advocated for socialism. I want single payer healthcare, and a basic income provided for all. Haven't you read my thread on the subsidized economy?

More worrying about other peoples shit. You are a pathetic loser. That's why you are alone.

[Unclefred]

What are you talking about? I've always advocated for socialism. I want single payer healthcare, and a basic income provided for all. Haven't you read my thread on the subsidized economy?

Definitely single payer. It's amazing that people settled for the democrat ass rape we got instead. I think in a decade or two the basic income will be in the conversation for real.

[Talon]

It will have to be. there aren't going to be any jobs left that haven't been off shored, outsourced or mechanized. Imaging when they can deliver goods by trucks with NO drivers, planes with no pilots and ships with no captains. That's going to be a massive problem.

Definitely single payer. It's amazing that people settled for the democrat ass rape we got instead. I think in a decade or two the basic income will be in the conversation for real.

[dudeman]

It will have to be. there aren't going to be any jobs left that haven't been off shored, outsourced or mechanized. Imaging when they can deliver goods by trucks with NO drivers, planes with no pilots and ships with no captains. That's going to be a massive problem.

I should be good then. They need someone to actually fix all that shit.

[Talon]

Agreed. I don't mind paying for people that need it, because I might too someday, but I don't like leeches.

I hate paying for other peoples shit.

[Unclefred]

Australia has made a pretty good go with Socialism. Granted, their policy on guns is out of whack. It has helped too, that they wre not under the immagration pressure that we and Europe face.

[Talon]

They have pretty tough immigration policy from what I understand. I guess it pays to be an island sometimes.

Australia has made a pretty good go with Socialism. Granted, their policy on guns is out of whack. It has helped too, that they wre not under the immagration pressure that we and Europe face.

[Unclefred]

They have pretty tough immigration policy from what I understand. I guess it pays to be an island sometimes.

I'm sure they want to keep the kiwis out.

[Talon]

Wouldn't you?!

I'm sure they want to keep the kiwis out.

[Absolutely!]

Not at all. If you want to discuss theoretical socialism, it is a decent system of government that looks out for the good of the many.


But the reality of it put in to practice is that it is used as a path to an oligarchy, and is used by tyrants to pretend to be helping people while creating a system where there is a higher ruling class and a subordinate servant class.

*****But most systems of government all become the same once the reach a certain size and complexity. There is no "republic" or democracy, or even communist regime at the size of a major country. They all become blends of many types of processes.

We live in a country that is a combination of representative republic with socialism and totalitarianism woven through it.

You are mistaking socialism for "socialism". Fascism generally will call itself socialist. Despots generally dolly up their dictatorships with 'free people's happy joy land' type labelling but that doesn't actually mean it is true.

A lot of western europe is socialist. England is socialist, as are Australia and New Zealand. Some countries take it too far, some don't take it far enough. But don't rely on the self-labelling to determine what is socialist. As to creation of oligarchy, that's far more prevalent in the US than it is in New Zealand. Oligarchies happen when a few individuals get too much power over the others. And start to think they are a better or more deserving kind of person.

Socialism has to do with 2 things:
1. considering that we're all in this together, and that our taxes are a kind of 'kitty' or subscription fee, that we all provide, that is still our own money and to be used on those things that we actually want;
2. striving to save money by doing deals as a group, rather than as individuals.

Socialism has to do with survival of the group, not survival of the individual. So it's not me against you - it's me and you against the world. More of a team mentality.

[Mayaca]

You are mistaking socialism for "socialism". Fascism generally will call itself socialist. Despots generally dolly up their dictatorships with 'free people's happy joy land' type labelling but that doesn't actually mean it is true.

A lot of western europe is socialist. England is socialist, as are Australia and New Zealand. Some countries take it too far, some don't take it far enough. But don't rely on the self-labelling to determine what is socialist. As to creation of oligarchy, that's far more prevalent in the US than it is in New Zealand. Oligarchies happen when a few individuals get too much power over the others. And start to think they are a better or more deserving kind of person.

Socialism has to do with 2 things:
1. considering that we're all in this together, and that our taxes are a kind of 'kitty' or subscription fee, that we all provide, that is still our own money and to be used on those things that we actually want;
2. striving to save money by doing deals as a group, rather than as individuals.

Socialism has to do with survival of the group, not survival of the individual. So it's not me against you - it's me and you against the world. More of a team mentality.

I stand by what I wrote because even where "Socialism" is working, it is not pure theoretical socialism, but a blend with some elected officials, some appointed, there are threads of democratic practices woven through. So anywhere it is working on a large scale, even socialism has morphed into a blend of government "concepts."


As stated, all governments at a certain size and complexity become a blend.