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.

 

Chicago Dem Wants Socialism to Have ‘Control of Every Single Facet of Our Life’

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:33 AM
link   

To me, we’ll have achieved democratic socialism not when there is no conflict in the world, but when our societies are not governed based on power, but are governed based on the mutual understanding that everybody deserves a decent and quality life.


Democratic socialists won't ACCEPT anyone that disagrees with them.

jacobinmag.com...
edit on 23-2-2019 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I was going to use that as an example as well.


I'm a fat guy who smokes, drinks, eats poorly.

I pay, as an individual, more for my healthcare as a result.


Now if the "collective" starts paying for everyone, then everyone will be responsible for everyone's health.

The "collective" might say, "We're tired of spending more on your individual life choices, so we (as the collective), will determine what you can eat, drink."

My individual freedom to self-determine, to choose will be lost in favor of the "collective".


edit on 23-2-2019 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




But, as you say, majority rules and minorities just have to learn to deal, right?

You know of an alternative that isn't Dictatorship ?



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

If majority rule actually worked, wouldn't Brexit have already have been a done deal?




posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Brexit shows us the illusion of Democracy , as someone once said Democracy isn't perfect but it's all we've got.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: ketsuko




But, as you say, majority rules and minorities just have to learn to deal, right?

You know of an alternative that isn't Dictatorship ?


It's called the rule of law. It used to be what we had until people embraced subjective truth.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: DBCowboy

Brexit shows us the illusion of Democracy , as someone once said Democracy isn't perfect but it's all we've got.


So you agree that corrupt leadership uses the illusion of "democracy" in order to forward it's own agenda.
edit on 23-2-2019 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

But it isn't what we got.

Article 4 Section 4 of that GD piece of paper.



Section 4

. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion;

and on application of the legislature, or of the executive

(when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.


www.law.cornell.edu...

Democratic socialism.

Is not constitutional.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: ketsuko




But, as you say, majority rules and minorities just have to learn to deal, right?

You know of an alternative that isn't Dictatorship ?


Perhaps you should read up on US history and their constitution - or closer to home study our own form of govt.
Or any govt in the western world for that matter. You'll find several examples of systems that are not majority rule - basically because any sane person understands that is a bad idea.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




So you agree that corrupt leadership uses the illusion of "democracy" in order to forward it's own agenda.

At certain times that would seem to be the case , it seems we stretched the boundaries of Democracy when we gave the "wrong" answer to the question asked.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

One party rulle.
Quite correct.....tht is what they inttend.

You are correct but a little slow! I have been warning about this for months.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96




Article 4 Section 4 of that GD piece of paper.

Cool , one party rule , seems to be working for China.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: UKTruth

But ... but ... democracy is always good isn't it?


There are, as we know at least, many forms of Democracy. Majority rule is most definitely the ugly sister of the litter and why it's always wise to steer well clear of it.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Cool.

Someone doesn't understand what a republican form of government is.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: neo96




Article 4 Section 4 of that GD piece of paper.

Cool , one party rule , seems to be working for China.


Seriously, perhaps you should step away from the keyboard. It's getting embarrassing. A Republican form of Govt is not the Republican party. It has nothing to do with party.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I'm sorry , not a scholar of American politics or the Constitution.
Don't be embarrassed , there's much misunderstanding on both sides.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: UKTruth

I'm sorry , not a scholar of American politics or the Constitution.


Perhaps you should be more careful about wading in on things you know nothing about.

edit on 23/2/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




That's a rhetorical question, isn't it?


I don't think so... The OP posted a paragraph... you said it was unconstitutional what the guy in the paragraph said. I asked what was unconstitutional about it... how is that a rhetorical question?



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: tinner07

Subsequent posts have clearly illustrated how this inhibits personal freedoms, individual liberties, self-determination.



posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96




To me, we’ll have achieved democratic socialism not when there is no conflict in the world, but when our societies are not governed based on power, but are governed based on the mutual understanding that everybody deserves a decent and quality life.


again... how do you find fault in that? seriously?




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join