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.

 

The semantic game of socialists and other thoughts

page: 1
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I only put this in the mudpit because i feel like insults have been being hurled around my threads lately. Not that I mind them, but I dont want that to be a reason to shut down discussion.

I am not a big fan of socialism, and have had many discussion about it in my life time.

Two issues recently made me want to make a thread on this, both sort of stemming from the same thing.

These issues are this.

1. People saying they arent socialist, but "Democratic Socialist"

2. People saying any bad socialist country you can point out wasnt a real socialist country.

Both of these problems seem to me to try to use semantics to get out of defending socialism. Its a clever strategy that I saw often in my time as a collegiate debater.

You would criticize socialism that they advocated, they would say their form of socialism wouldnt do the things you were criticizing. In the end they just advocated utopia and claimed because there system was unique only they knew exactly what it was, and all criticisms of it were based on fake socialism and didnt apply. A total worthless argument.

Now the first argument, the democratic socialism claim, actually intrigued me.

I took this to mean part capitalist, part socialist. In other words, basically the status quo of most countries, that have free markets but socialist programs. In this sense both the US and Sweden would fit in to this category of being a mix, with Sweden having more socialist policies than the US.

But it wasnt full blown government controlling almost all of the economy socialism.

But then I read the democratic socialists New Green Deal, and guess what; its basically just socialism.

It makes me feel like they know socialism has many problems and would be unpopular, so they try to shirk that thru semantics.

The same with the no true scotsman fallacy, where every socialist disaster you bring up "Isnt real socialism"

My solution is to try to articulate the particulars of what I am criticizing, regardless of the semantic game.

I dont like massive government control of the economy, or policies based on immutable characteristics such as race and gender. Thats what the democratic socialists are offering.

I understand how these types of massive government control led to the tens of millions dying in maos china and the soviet Union.

You can call these systems whatever you want; they were bad and making the same types of government expansion they did will also be bad.

Claiming that was all fake socialism and your system is different is really just a wayt of saying if you were in power, things would work out. That dangerous and the exact same mindset that leads us to brutal dictators.

I have a alot to say on the topic, but that is the bare bones.

Here is a nearly two hour video I did on it.

Skip to like 5 minutes 13 seconds to sskip me failing to be funny and shuffling with my equipment.





posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
1. People saying they arent socialist, but "Democratic Socialist"

2. People saying any bad socialist country you can point out wasnt a real socialist country.


When they say the failed socialist countries weren't "real socialism" simply tell them they were actually Democratic Socialist countries and watch them attempt to wrap their heads around that.

Socialism will not work because human nature is a real thing. The average person will only work to the point where they have achieved the maximum personal benefit they require or demand. If they can receive the same benefit for sitting on their ass with their hand out, that's what the average person will do. Furthermore, the average person is never going to work for the benefit of strangers. To do so simply makes zero sense and practically applies some bizarre hive mentality onto humanity. We're not ants or bees, we're individuals and as such all of life should be merit based.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Bottom line is this: people today are becoming to confused. Why? I don't know. I just saw on NHK about the homeless problem in Osaka. People now are dying of alcohol poisoning. And that is on a daily basis. Sad, but I guess it is cheaper to let the people die on the streets and keep the economy going at the sake shops which i think the govt. gives a subsidy to the shops to keep the sake cups at a very low cost. Remember Night Train at 67 cents a bottle in LA in the late 70's.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:37 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:38 PM
link   
You are spot on again.

Keep fighting the good fight. I, for one, appreciate your efforts.




posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
You are spot on again.

Keep fighting the good fight. I, for one, appreciate your efforts.



I sat down to do a 30 minute livestream on socialism and rambled for about two hours.

I dont know if i have worthwhile thoughts on the matter or am just a bored windbag.

But I had fun doing it!



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there. Those countries aren't dictatorships and the citizens aren't suffering at all. Those countries in many regards are flourishing with very happy citizens.

We confuse this with Argentina and actual Socialist dictators. They're completely different things.

Keeping in mind that there is no such thing as Utopia.

It would be great if we all lived under a libertarian regime with very low taxes, now over reaching laws, small government, where everyone helped each other just because we had a great sense of community and there were no criminals.

But the socialism comes in when. We need a police force because we have too many criminals. We need a jail and then a prison to house them in. We need some programs to rehabilitate them for when they come out, and then we have to do something with all the old people lying there dying on the street who have no family to help them, because decaying bodies ont he sidewalk...oh wait, we would like to pool some money together to build a road but...etc.
edit on 4-1-2019 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
a reply to: Grambler

I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there. Those countries aren't dictatorships and the citizens aren't suffering at all. Those countries in many regards are flourishing with very happy citizens.

We confuse this with Argentina and actual Socialist dictators. They're completely different things.


Then why does the green new deal look more like total socialism than Scandinavia?

Shouldnt I judge them based on their actual policy advocasies rather than their semantic wishes?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Socialism, communism are wonderful ideologies.

Until you add people.

Then it sucks.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I really like your idea that the devil is in the semantics. You try and argue against socialism and it is always defended as 'what about the public roads' .. 'what about utilities and waste disposal'. They come up with these programs and it is hard to argue against certain forms of socialism compared to the government/society owning and regulating all production and distribution.

I also think that if we could break this down into different parts, it would help the discussion overall. Then we can point out stuff like universal health care and right to housing being inherent human rights. Which imo they are not. If we could get past the feel good measures and take a look at the cold hard facts, it would change things....hahahahaha, sorry I just had to type that out to see how it appeared. Time for a bad mood. Nothing is going to change. No one really changes their opinions, do they? The only thing that really changes is the old guard dies off and when the new guard is in sufficient numbers, they get to try out their ideas. With the way our educations system is going (working perfect for tptb) we are screwed.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing




I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there. Those countries aren't dictatorships and the citizens aren't suffering at all. Those countries in many regards are flourishing with very happy citizens.

We confuse this with Argentina and actual Socialist dictators. They're completely different things.


That's the beauty part of it. Bernie Sanders mistaking democratic socialism with social democracy has directly led to the rise in democratic socialism in particular, and socialism in general, in the US. It's hilarious.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing



I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there.


You mean primarily white countries with Western culture and value.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf
a reply to: amazing




I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there. Those countries aren't dictatorships and the citizens aren't suffering at all. Those countries in many regards are flourishing with very happy citizens.

We confuse this with Argentina and actual Socialist dictators. They're completely different things.


That's the beauty part of it. Bernie Sanders mistaking democratic socialism with social democracy has directly led to the rise in democratic socialism in particular, and socialism in general, in the US. It's hilarious.


I don't see what's so funny. Most of Sander's policies are really safety nets or copies of scandinavian policies.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing
a reply to: Grambler

I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there. Those countries aren't dictatorships and the citizens aren't suffering at all. Those countries in many regards are flourishing with very happy citizens.

We confuse this with Argentina and actual Socialist dictators. They're completely different things.


Then why does the green new deal look more like total socialism than Scandinavia?

Shouldnt I judge them based on their actual policy advocasies rather than their semantic wishes?


But that's one thing. And mainly stemming from the fact that the US isn't doing anything about climate change. Keep in mind, I'm not only talking about trying to stop it or slow it, we don't even know if that's possible, but policies that help us deal with it.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: amazing



I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there.


You mean primarily white countries with Western culture and value.


Nobody said that. If you look at the scandinavian countries. They, most of them, rank near the top, of all countries in the world on quality of life, happiness, education, health etc. There has to be a reason for that.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

And don't forget a lot of those nordic countries are oil rich. Once the free resources are extracted, the true cost of socialism will be felt. Will the people redevelop themselves or just suffer in misery?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Metallicus

And don't forget a lot of those nordic countries are oil rich. Once the free resources are extracted, the true cost of socialism will be felt. Will the people redevelop themselves or just suffer in misery?


The US Is oil rich though. Why aren't we as high on those charts as the scandinavian countries?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

We need socialism because old people will die in the streets without it?

Kittens too?




posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Propagandalf
a reply to: amazing




I think the problem is that when people like Sanders and Cortez and whomever are talking about Democratic Socialism or anything like that, they're mainly refering to countries like the Scandinavian countries and all the programs that work well there. Those countries aren't dictatorships and the citizens aren't suffering at all. Those countries in many regards are flourishing with very happy citizens.

We confuse this with Argentina and actual Socialist dictators. They're completely different things.


That's the beauty part of it. Bernie Sanders mistaking democratic socialism with social democracy has directly led to the rise in democratic socialism in particular, and socialism in general, in the US. It's hilarious.


I don't see what's so funny. Most of Sander's policies are really safety nets or copies of scandinavian policies.


Yes, but he labelled it wrong. It's his mislabeling that led to the socialist reemergence in the US, while social democracy, the "scandinavian policies" he meant to be talking about, has been left in the dark.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Here's the problem with socialism - if you took a vote and gathered together all the folks who were pro-socialism, then gave them a country, infrastructure and everything that currently exists in their world and told them to go run it to their expectations, it would be a smoldering mess in about 1-3 years, mainly due to no-one working and so everything stops and goes moldy and rusty - then its Mad Max time.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join