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.

 

Define Socialism... IN YOUR OWN WORDS.

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Kharron

Where does the Constitution give them the power to conscript us?

Necessities in a time of war don't count, although in Nam it wasnt a necessity, but this logic of hey in this imperialist state lets give the state endless mobs of millions of cannon fodder to go subjugate the planet even further with, yeah good luck with that, like communism I will resist.


It's called a draft. And it has happened before and Pentagon is looking at it again and wants to include women. If you think it's unconstitutional I suggest you write to your representatives.




posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Resilient1
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Just to piggyback on your post, here's where ICE is cited as constitutional too.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


How exactly did the framers of the constitution think that these programs would be funded? Did they think the money would come from the poor or working class?

We can know the answer to this. The only tax was on land owners. So when the constitution was written it was decided that all of these social programs would be paid by the owners of production.

Our founding fathers recognized that the most prosperous were the ones who took the greatest advantages from being a part of society. So they created a system where the class that benefited the most was responsible for defence and care of the system that afforded them such prosperity.

This is not taking from the rich to give to the poor. It's tasking those who benifit the most with the responsibility for ensuring the continued strength of the system.

It is the owners who in their greed who have largely cut their taxes and placed the majority of the burden on the working middle class. It is the owners who would allow greed to be more important than the stability of society.

This nation had the greatest economic boom when the ownership class was taxed the highest and regulated through anti-trust laws to ensure small business could compete in the market.

Trickle down economics is the exact opposite of the intent of our constitution. Our founding fathers were were brilliant men, whom if we continued to follow we would not be in the mess we are today.

Our founding fathers created a "mixed economy" that balanced socialism with free market capitalism. Where the uppercalss benefited from the free market but were expected to maintain the system socially.


edit on 3-7-2018 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:28 PM
link   
socialism is giving your personal power over to government so they can choose what's best for you



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Kharron


originally posted by: Kharron
Necessities in a time of war don't count, although in Nam it wasnt a necessity, but this logic of hey in this imperialist state lets give the state endless mobs of millions of cannon fodder to go subjugate the planet even further with, yeah good luck with that, like communism I will resist.

edit on 3-7-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Kharron


originally posted by: Kharron
Necessities in a time of war don't count, although in Nam it wasnt a necessity, but this logic of hey in this imperialist state lets give the state endless mobs of millions of cannon fodder to go subjugate the planet even further with, yeah good luck with that, like communism I will resist.


And?

I believe this thread's topic is 'Define Socialism... IN YOUR OWN WORDS'. What does this have to do with our Constitution?

Why are you so intent on attacking me over a hypothetical? Slow morning?



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Resilient1
a reply to: MrVancityeagle

Is America a Capitalist Democratic Republic? Are there any countries that already have Socialism in place? If you like that model why not move to one of these countries instead of trying to overthrow the government?


this is an idiotic response, typical of the lack of intelligence common amongst right wingers.

First of all I dont live in America.

Second of all suggesting that because you want to improve something that isn't perfect, you should just leave instead is just retarded.

and you just assume that someone who does not agree with something "wants to overthrow the government"

typical reactionary dumbed down right wing response.

So I assume you didn't like America under Obama ? Why didn't you just leave then ?



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:53 PM
link   
A broad spectrum of societal structures of the political view that the group/organisation/Party/Country primary responsibility is to ensure everyones needs are met. This is mainly achieved by sharing capital, resources; the idea co-operation is better than competition and that society and industry should be ethical not exploitative.

While fairer than Capitalism it is less stable in the short-medium term when put into practice so far. In the long term it looks to be the far more stable option as resource based economy is inherently unsustainable (with current tech).



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
socialism is giving your personal power over to government so they can choose what's best for you



no it isn't.

It is having THE PUBLIC in charge of the government, so the public can choose what is best for themselves.

Under Capitalism you have the 1% and oligarchs choosing for you. Therefore most of the legislation is passed to benefit the 1% oligarchs.

Thats why a lot of your tax dollars are spent on invading other countries and killing millions of people for their profits.

Under Capitalism democracy will always be circumvented through lobbying and corruption etc. That is why democracy is a lie, and we live in an oligarchy. Rule by the rich.
edit on 3-7-2018 by MrVancityeagle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

It is having THE PUBLIC in charge of the government, so the public can choose what is best for themselves.


Please do elaborate how that actually works...



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

It is having THE PUBLIC in charge of the government, so the public can choose what is best for themselves.


Please do elaborate how that actually works...


It can work in a number of different ways.

Representative democracy, which is basically what we have now, where reps make the decisions and vote.

Or through Direct democracy, whereby everybody votes and makes decisions. Obviously this is a better system, but more complicated to implement. Though with technology how hard would it be for everybody to vote on things online

In the end the public will all have equal shares of the banks, big business, etc. They will decide how public funds are to be spent etc. They will decide wages for specific jobs etc.

The main thing however, is that profits from corporations, large companies, banks will not be consolidated in the hands of a few but will be diverted to things like health care, education, infrastructure, subsidized services etc.

Also the idea that everybody will be the same is not true.

you can still have class hierarchy and incentives to work etc. , its just that the disparity in wealth will not be as massive as it is currently.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: MrVancityeagle


I dont know why it has become such a negative thing.


Probably because it has led to the deaths of millions.

It takes power and influence from the 99% as well. Some little farmer can’t eat from his own crops because it is owned by the “collective”.


this is the stock right wing response which is complete bull.

How many deaths has capitalism lead to ?

Got an answer ? It is far more than whatever you believe can be attritbuted to Socialism, if you want to play this game.


Stock, socialist piffle.

I’ll play that game. Collectivized farming under Stalin, for example. The cultural revolution under Mao, for example.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

It is having THE PUBLIC in charge of the government, so the public can choose what is best for themselves.


Please do elaborate how that actually works...


A "republic" aka representative democracy. Unfortunately greed and corruption tends to ensure the representatives represent only the elitist class. Not how it was written, but how narcissism dictates it.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96



Socialism is just one natural extension of basic human nature.


Socialism is the antithesis of human nature.

Human nature is pure darwinism.

Strong survive the weak gets eaten.

Unless your a socialist then you'll just outsource your existence to the state by majority 'rule'.

AKA called SOCIAL ENGINEERING.

Instead of EVOLVING.


I would assume you oppose capitalism as well then. Since its also not found on nature.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: MrVancityeagle


I dont know why it has become such a negative thing.


Probably because it has led to the deaths of millions.

It takes power and influence from the 99% as well. Some little farmer can’t eat from his own crops because it is owned by the “collective”.


this is the stock right wing response which is complete bull.

How many deaths has capitalism lead to ?

Got an answer ? It is far more than whatever you believe can be attritbuted to Socialism, if you want to play this game.


Stock, socialist piffle.

I’ll play that game. Collectivized farming under Stalin, for example. The cultural revolution under Mao, for example.


we can play this game. But since every war in history has been for resources and profit, and since capitalism is a system based on making profits, every single death from war in history is a result of Capitalism.

Every single war has been a capitalist war

That by far dwarfs any claims of deaths from Socialism



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: MrVancityeagle


I dont know why it has become such a negative thing.


Probably because it has led to the deaths of millions.

It takes power and influence from the 99% as well. Some little farmer can’t eat from his own crops because it is owned by the “collective”.


this is the stock right wing response which is complete bull.

How many deaths has capitalism lead to ?

Got an answer ? It is far more than whatever you believe can be attritbuted to Socialism, if you want to play this game.


Stock, socialist piffle.

I’ll play that game. Collectivized farming under Stalin, for example. The cultural revolution under Mao, for example.


Can you give me an example where facism or forced communism wasn't masked by calling it socialism? Any example regardless of death count?

Elitism leads to the usurpation of Socialism to the benifit of the few over the many. Which is no longer socialism.
edit on 3-7-2018 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: MrVancityeagle


I dont know why it has become such a negative thing.


Probably because it has led to the deaths of millions.

It takes power and influence from the 99% as well. Some little farmer can’t eat from his own crops because it is owned by the “collective”.


this is the stock right wing response which is complete bull.

How many deaths has capitalism lead to ?

Got an answer ? It is far more than whatever you believe can be attritbuted to Socialism, if you want to play this game.


Stock, socialist piffle.

I’ll play that game. Collectivized farming under Stalin, for example. The cultural revolution under Mao, for example.


Can you give me an example where facism or forced communism wasn't masked by calling it socialism? Any example regardless of death count.

Elitism leads to the usurpation of Socialism to the benifit of the few over the many. Which is no longer socialism.


North Korea, probably. It’s a socialist, racist, junta.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

I like to think I'm a bit of pragmatist but I also like to think we've developed a little further than the 'survival of the fittest' mentality and that values like compassion, consideration and empathy have seeped into our collective consciousness.

Unfortunately then I read threads like these.
We have progressed so far in some ways since we crept out of the trees yet so little in many, many other ways.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Work like a slave, eat like a dog.

Don't work like a slave, get put down like a dog.
edit on 3-7-2018 by Specimen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

That is why democracy is a lie, and we live in an oligarchy. Rule by the rich.


Under socialism we'd still be ruled by the rich.

There'd just be different names on the banking accounts.


Just as an aside, name one nation that has been successfully ruled by the poor.



posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: MrVancityeagle

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: MrVancityeagle


I dont know why it has become such a negative thing.


Probably because it has led to the deaths of millions.

It takes power and influence from the 99% as well. Some little farmer can’t eat from his own crops because it is owned by the “collective”.


this is the stock right wing response which is complete bull.

How many deaths has capitalism lead to ?

Got an answer ? It is far more than whatever you believe can be attritbuted to Socialism, if you want to play this game.


Stock, socialist piffle.

I’ll play that game. Collectivized farming under Stalin, for example. The cultural revolution under Mao, for example.


Can you give me an example where facism or forced communism wasn't masked by calling it socialism? Any example regardless of death count.

Elitism leads to the usurpation of Socialism to the benifit of the few over the many. Which is no longer socialism.


North Korea, probably. It’s a socialist, racist, junta.


That is a dictatorship. The people don't share in the ownership. Therefore, that is not an example of socialism either.

Without share in ownership the workers have no incentive to work harder or invent anything. Everything they bring to the market is owned by the dictator. Which is why their market is stagnate.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join