It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bernie Sanders Supporters Can’t Describe Socialism

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: okrian

We have it now and it's destroying the economy. I think the experiment needs to end before we start to look like Greece ... or Venezuela.




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Esoterotica
Maybe if we were a democratic socialist country instead of a quasi fascist oligarchic capitalist country we'd have a better education system & people would be able to give you the Oxford definitions which some seem to put so much value on.


"The most urgent necessity is, not that the State should teach, but that it should allow education. All monopolies are detestable, but the worst of all is the monopoly of education."

-Frédéric Bastiat



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Tearman
I think most Sanders supporters have pretty clear ideas about why they support him and don't realy give a damn about your definition of socialism.


Yes, they want to use the brute force of government to forcibly take money away from people they don't like, so they cane have "free" stuff.


It's interesting that conservatives like to equate taxing people as a Socialist ideal even though we've always paid taxes. The difference between Socialism and Capitalism is just where the government spends the taxes.

Like going by what is written by TheBulk above, I'm not sure he understands what Socialism is.
edit on 2-2-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: amazing

The military is not a social program... yet.


If you're in the military its very socialist like and guess what, you're completely dependent on and property of the government.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

Considering how badly the right misrepresents Socialism, I'm not surprised. It's hard to get a consistent answer about what Socialism is and isn't. Then that propaganda bleeds over to the left because people want to have balanced perspectives and get confused. Heck conservative members are doing it here in this thread.


Yes, its "the right's" fault that there are so many examples of failed socialist states. I bet you think its "the right's" fault people fear Muslims too. Is there anything your boogyman isn't responsible for?


Failed Socialist states? Most of the 1st world is Socialist to some degree, with the countries with the highest standards of living being the most Socialist. Your view of reality is warped buddy.

PS: Yes it is the right's fault that people fear muslims.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tearman

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Tearman
I think most Sanders supporters have pretty clear ideas about why they support him and don't realy give a damn about your definition of socialism.


Yes, they want to use the brute force of government to forcibly take money away from people they don't like, so they cane have "free" stuff.
Way to put words in other people's mouths. Good job.


Much of Sanders campaign platform is based on taking down those evil, nasty rich people on Wall Street and in corporate offices by making them fork over 90% of what they make ... oh and taxing every stock transaction on Wall Street which sounds real, real good until those idiots get their 401(k) accounts ... and giving them free college, free health care, free ...

So, please explain to me how that statement was at all inaccurate:


use the brute force of government to forcibly take money away from people they don't like, so they cane have "free" stuff.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk

I was really implying that mandatory conscription is a sort of socialist program.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Tearman
I think most Sanders supporters have pretty clear ideas about why they support him and don't realy give a damn about your definition of socialism.


Yes, they want to use the brute force of government to forcibly take money away from people they don't like, so they cane have "free" stuff.


It's interesting that conservatives like to equate taxing people as a Socialist ideal even though we've always paid taxes. The difference between Socialism and Capitalism is just where the government spends the taxes.


Sensible taxing for worthy reasons is one thing. Exorbitantly high taxes to pay for failed policy, from a group you demonize so that Americans become dependent on government is an entirely different thing.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   

The net effect of all this outsized fearmongering, combined with the economic and social buffeting the United States has gone through over the last couple of decades, is that the word “socialism” has been denuded of the negative associations that scares the crap out of Fox News viewers. Polling over the last few years has shown Americans are much more receptive to some of what socialism has to offer and will not wet themselves in fear when they hear the word. This is particularly true of younger people who were in grade school when the Soviet Union collapsed. In 2011, a Pew Research Center poll found that 49 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds had a positive view of socialism. Considering the enthusiasm of that age group for Bernie Sanders, it seems safe to assume that number has at the very least remained stable, if not gone up.


Read more



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Tearman
I think most Sanders supporters have pretty clear ideas about why they support him and don't realy give a damn about your definition of socialism.


Yes, they want to use the brute force of government to forcibly take money away from people they don't like, so they cane have "free" stuff.


It's interesting that conservatives like to equate taxing people as a Socialist ideal even though we've always paid taxes. The difference between Socialism and Capitalism is just where the government spends the taxes.


Sensible taxing for worthy reasons is one thing. Exorbitantly high taxes to pay for failed policy, from a group you demonize so that Americans become dependent on government is an entirely different thing.


You mean like the War on Drugs?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
PS: Yes it is the right's fault that people fear muslims.


Yes I'm sure it has nothing to do with the daily actions of Muslims. Do you think it's the left's fault that minorities fear Republicans or white people?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   
You know there's a pretty big difference between these two things.... one, making sure a small number of individuals don't accumulate overwhelmingly disprpoportionate levels of power. And two, having the state take over everything.

The first point is what motivates me as a Bernie supporter. Private individuals should not be able to accumulate that much wealth (and thus power) unchecked. It just makes no sense to allow so much power to fall into so few hands.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tearman

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Tearman
I think most Sanders supporters have pretty clear ideas about why they support him and don't realy give a damn about your definition of socialism.


Yes, they want to use the brute force of government to forcibly take money away from people they don't like, so they cane have "free" stuff.
Way to put words in other people's mouths. Good job.


Socialism cannot exist without tyranny. Redistribution requires forcibly taking from others. You cannot have socialism without other people's money. It isn't a matter of putting words in people's mouths but stating the obvious.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

Considering how badly the right misrepresents Socialism, I'm not surprised. It's hard to get a consistent answer about what Socialism is and isn't. Then that propaganda bleeds over to the left because people want to have balanced perspectives and get confused. Heck conservative members are doing it here in this thread.


Yes, its "the right's" fault that there are so many examples of failed socialist states. I bet you think its "the right's" fault people fear Muslims too. Is there anything your boogyman isn't responsible for?


Failed Socialist states? Most of the 1st world is Socialist to some degree, with the countries with the highest standards of living being the most Socialist. Your view of reality is warped buddy.

PS: Yes it is the right's fault that people fear muslims.


I see.

So "the right" flew planes into buildings, blow themselves up with suicide vests all over the world taking as many people as possible with them, make videos in which they behead people, burn them alive in cages, slit their throats on beaches, threaten everyone who does not say "Allahu Akhbar ...

Yep, I can see how "the right" is really to blame for all of it.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


You mean like the War on Drugs?


Yes, just like that. So you agree with me?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
capitalism seems to represent trickle down economics from a plutocracy



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Isn't that the one President Reagan was a massive proponent of?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Esoterotica




Maybe if we were a democratic socialist country instead of a quasi fascist oligarchic capitalist country we'd have a better education system & people would be able to give you the Oxford definitions which some seem to put so much value on.


There has never been a "democratic socialist" country, so I'm not quite sure where you're getting your evidence from. Likely nowhere.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tearman
You know there's a pretty big difference between these two things.... one, making sure a small number of individuals don't accumulate overwhelmingly disprpoportionate levels of power. And two, having the state take over everything.

The first point is what motivates me as a Bernie supporter. Private individuals should not be able to accumulate that much wealth (and thus power) unchecked. It just makes no sense to allow so much power to fall into so few hands.


See what I mean... who are you to dictate who has too much wealth? Would you care how much wealth someone had if they blew it on your ideology?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Tearman

So giving that much power to the government is INSANE, but as a Bernie supporter it's what you want.




top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join