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: 3
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Painterz

But that's not what leftists are trying to implement or reinforce. You're being purposely disingenuous.

They are trying to implement full govt control over every aspect our personal lives, the economy and business.


It's called communism.


Bullsnip.

Communism is a classless, moneyless, stateless utopia.

The Incas were the closest thing to communism this world has ever seen.

No one else has even come close.


I'm talking about the bad communism, like Cuba, Soviet Union, Venezuela, etc.

Not the good kind you endorse.





posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Painterz

You don't pay attention much do you? Did you know that in some UK hospitals, you have have to clean your own rooms and provide your own bed linens if you want cleanliness?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

The Incas were also into child sacrifice.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Calling those countries Communist is like calling Bruce Jenner ma'am.


edit on 4-1-2019 by Bone75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Yes sir.




posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


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


Hmmm, government control over most aspects of the Economy?? Only Healthcare, Education and Energy. How much of the economy could that be?

I seem to remember some here stating that that is some "ism" but I can't remember which one, if I could only put my F-F- finger on what letter it began with......



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
Communism is a classless, moneyless, stateless utopia.

It is not a system to be implemented, but rather a goal to be obtained.

The Incas were the closest thing to communism this world has ever seen.

No one else has even come close.


Uh, the Inca empire was ruled by emperors who were believed to be the physical manifestation of the sun god, the royal/noble families and priests, and the administrative government authorities (mostly who were already nobles). The rest of their society were all lowly laborers, impoverished and restricted the same way anyone else living under the tombstone of royals find themselves. 40,000 elites ruling over a society of 12 million... 1/3rd of 1 percent demanding taxes and tributes be paid by the 99.67% of the common folks. Their nobles then declared war against the Spaniards, not to defend the people, but to ensure the huge wealth of royalty held gold and silver didn't find its way into Spanish hands... millions of Incas killed in a war to defend the 1/3rd of 1 percent.

Is it any wonder why communism, in all its forms, is a fool's errand and very much skin to slavery?



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: DBCowboy

Calling those countries Communist is like calling Bruce Jenner ma'am.



...well, the same people trying to install socialism and communism into this country are the same folks who DEMAND Jenner be called "ma'am" because he woke up one day and said "I think I'll pretend I'm a woman today." So the analogy is apt.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Socialism, Communism, blah, blah, blah. Has everyone forgot about Nero. No memory of Bread and circuses. This is all about wielding power and to do that in this country you need the support of the people. At least until you control them.

This is the true agenda of the Democrats. They want control over you each and every one of you. They will offer all the bread and circuses you can handle until you relinquish control. Then their true agenda will be revealed. Guess what that is gonna be.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: amazing



There has to be a reason for that.


There is and I gave it you. Add in their natural oil resources and bingo.


And I know that used to be a big part of it, but I think they are way more than their natural resources now. I think it only plays a small part now. I'll have to research more of course.
edit on 4-1-2019 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Update, what is wrong with the people in America these days. Seems like everyone 's mind has become polluted with stupidity.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: musicismagic
Update, what is wrong with the people in America these days. Seems like everyone 's mind has become polluted with stupidity.


Public education.

Socialism



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Bingo...





edit on 1.5.2019 by Murgatroid because: Felt like it...



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

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.


I thought the carbon numbers showed that the US was at the forefront of reducing emissions? is that not true?



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: amazing

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.


I thought the carbon numbers showed that the US was at the forefront of reducing emissions? is that not true?


No, it's true. We're cleaner than most other countries without passing draconian laws.

And I doubt amazing is referring to policies to react to if the climate changes we need to adapt to it come what may. That's what we should be doing because I don't see China or India stopping what they're doing anytime soon.



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: amazing

Precisely.
As Grambler said they use symantics and the phonetic similarities to try and sneak through their militant socialism ideas.

The Nordic countries largely have what they call socialized democracy. Pretty much capitalism as far as private business goes. They just have massive social services relative to the population.

They also fail to realize that those countries are extremely small (about the population of New Jersey)

They are extremely strict with immigration. And are about 90 - 95% ethnically Scandinavian.

Their economies are also largely dependent upon fossil fuel extraction. (which would be blasphemous to the new green deal)

Any reasonable person should be able to see that comparing this current attempt at socializing the US to the Scandinavian countries is absurd.


I don't think so. You can scale anything to size. Size of country doesn't really matter. Norway is the big oil producer, but you also have world leaders in fishing, cell phone manufacturing, Steel producing, Automobile manufacturing, reneweble energy production etc.



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: amazing

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.


I thought the carbon numbers showed that the US was at the forefront of reducing emissions? is that not true?


I don't know. And that's a hard claim to make. If we reduce emissions by 2% and Denmark reduces by 50%, who is really at the forefront of reducing emissions? (I just made up those numbers for the sake of argument.



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Communism: My employer doesn't give me a paycheck, the Government does in the form of food credits, an allowance, etc. I don't have to pay rent or utility bills. Close? Or do you have to pay bills out of your allowance for basic living? The only functional model of it worth looking at would be China.

edit on 1/5/2019 by r0xor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

I would say it depends on where each one started. If Denmark were polluting as much as say China or India, they might reduce their emissions by 50% and still be polluting more than the US even though the US only reduced their emissions by 2%. Percentages are funny that way.

It's not about overall reduction percentages as much as it is about who is polluting the least overall. Some countries are so dirty in the now that it's easy for them to reduce without doing much. And some countries, like the US, have been working to reduce pollution for decades now, so we have to work much harder for every tiny gain we get because it takes the very cleanest tech to realize it.

It's like weight loss. Someone who weighs 250 lbs is going to realize more net gain/week and a bigger loss percentage than I will because I'm getting close to my goal weight. My loss is in ounces sometimes, not pounds, but does that make it less significant?



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join