Logical consistency, or rather lack thereof.

I'm going to keep this short, because I know there are many recovering from tendinitis as well as ACL surgeries, so the jerking of knees is quite strong.

Anyways, I was conserving with an acquaintance when (of course) he brought up the topic of politics. The usual banter occurred - when I noticed something that I always notice.

Being a "Trump supporter," and I use that term lightly - my friend hardly has an interest in politics, and he willfully admits so. Anyways, he then began talking about the "Socialist," then as always, "The Communist."

And I have to draw a comparison, and one that each time I do so, draws much anger and possible contenders for the wittiest one-liners of all time, minus the witty part. For reasons unknown to myself, for I'm hardly a supporter of any current presidential candidate. Keep it in your pants, I'm not a Nazi-worshipping right winger nor am I a lefty who wants all teh free stuffz.

Anyways, I made it a point to my friend; isn't there a difference between socialism and communism? In which he replied, I don't know - they're basically the same thing, it's close enough.

But hold on - this is what gets me.

They aren't the same thing.

My friend, who is very knowledgable in electronic devices, would absolutely agree with me that a .20 gauge wire is not the same as 0.06. Are they basically the same thing? Absolutely - but there are distinct differences.

Is there a difference between decaf and regular coffee? Yes, "but they're basically the same thing," not really.

Isn't there a difference between "semi-auto," and "automatic?" But - I mean, it's close enough to say they're the same thing, right?

Oh - but of course not, "that's different," "that's a fallacy," yeah, yeah - but how about we begin to apply some logical consistency, and stop choosing to see things in black and white when it suits our need.

Is there a difference between mayonnaise and miracle whip? I mean, it's basically the same thing.

Again - not a supporter of any presidential candidate, sorry to disappoint, and I've been seeing this across the board.

My example may not be the best, but it demonstrates a point.

Socialism and communism are in fact different, albeit similar. Methamphetamine and Tylenol are in fact different, albeit similar.

But we clearly distinguish between the two, as is with almost anything. A .2/.5ohm build are in fact different, albeit similar. Except for one can lead to an overheating build, venting battery and possible explosion. The other is meant to withstand high temperatures.

Again - no partisan politics, just trying to demonstrate a point. When pumping gas, do you just decide to put diesel fuel in a V6 because "it's basically the same thing?"

Of course not.

I disagree.

Socialism is the state ownership of the means of production.

Communism is a theoretical system in which there is no state.

My example may not be the best, but it demonstrates a point.

Your examples are pertinent and emphatically explain the point, Rome.

The people talking about socialism are mostly the least educated on what it actually is.

Edit: ^^^^^ Prime example right on cue.

i thought you were gonna 'keep this short'.

and no your examples weren't the best.

It's your own fault, you use the word logic..in itself a mere concept, full of holes.
BTW, I do put put diesel in a V6 I own..because it is a diesel engine, I put petrol in another V6, because it is a petrol engine.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

My example may not be the best, but it demonstrates a point.

Your examples are pertinent and emphatically explain the point, Rome.

The people talking about socialism are mostly the least educated on what it actually is.

Edit: ^^^^^ Prime example right on cue.

"On the face of it, that is a very logical and plausible argument. The American people are indeed anti-Communist. Suppose you were to lay this book down right now, pick up a clip board and head for the nearest shopping center to conduct a survey on Americans' attitudes about Communism. "Sir," you say to the first prospect you encounter, "we would like to know if you are for or against Communism?"

"Most people would probably think you were putting them on. If we stick to our survey we would find that ninety-nine percent of the people are anti-Communist. We probably would be hard put to find anybody who would take an affirmative stand for Communism. So, on the surface it appears the American people are not pro-Communist. But before our imaginary interviewee walks away, you add: "Sir, before you leave there are a couple of other questions I would like to ask. You won't find these quite so insulting or ludicrous." Your next question is, "What is Communism? Will you define it, please?" Immediately a whole new situation has developed."

You can't ask, nor define what Communism "is." It is a totally simplistic question about an extremely complex situation. What is the Communism of Mao Tse-tung? What is the Communism of the late Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, or Marshal Tito?

Whether you agree or disagree, one thing is undeniable. No appreciable segment of the anti-Communist American public can agree on just what it is that they are against.

Isn't that frightening?

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

The least educated on the subject, choose thinly veiled personal attacks; rather than giving any substantive rebuttal.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirsYeah, uncanny ain't it.

a reply to: RomeByFire

Americans have been trained for almost a hundred years not to not only distrust Communists but also to hate them with a passion. It is such an emotionally mixed meme, that to venture in to any real consideration of it is to bring about major fractures with in our sense of reality. To really consider it as other than the epitomy of human folly is more than most of our fragile senses of self can bear.