Supposedly socialism has killed 200 million people

a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm sick and tired of people making the lame argument communism or socialism is responsible for millions of deaths.

Mao's great leap forward STARVED MILLIONS alone.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: dasman888

Leaders are by definition authoritarian, it's authoritarian leaders doing the murdering not the isms....

This points to the flawed logic at the core of what these folks want. They want do use the state to implement THEIR will. They don’t like it when the government isn’t in their control because they’re all core authoritarians.

That's right, government is great as long as it does their bidding for them....

I've come to the conclusion that too much of a good thing, will always be a bad thing.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: dfnj2015

designed in such a way corruption is simply not possible.

It has been tried in every way since man walked this earth and hasn't been successful.
Just read or watch anything about communes or "Utopian" types of communities. There is always, always someone in charge or a leader. There is always someone getting a little more. I think this is just human nature.

In many parts of Africa they have not left the idea of tribalism/socialism... Let me explain.. You are a smart entrepreneur and lets say you found a 100$ bill laying on the ground. There is a need for hammers and axes in your community so you go to town and buy several for resale. You return to your village and do a markup on the items you purchased of some 10 to 20 percent for resale and restock. The next thing that happens is your family both close and far hear you have hammers and axes so they come by and take what they need without paying....because they are family and it is share and share alike....

Some may not believe this example and it is a poor attempt, I will admit, no matter how true however, like I said many of the absolute poorest places still live in the tribal/socialist system and anyone who has a business is not of that tribe and certainly has no family taking from them.. It does not matter if it is tools or food you are gonna give away free stuff until you have nothing left to give. So everyone stays equally poor and miserable.

Small communes/tribes/hunter gathers/where everyone knows each other can work because those who do not contribute are warned and finally told to leave if they do not change their ways and contribute.

a reply to: dfnj2015

When will you drop your ideology? Why is it so important for you to keep pushing in peoples' faces? That's what Trump and Clinton supporters do. Don't be like them. Learn from their rigidity, don't emulate them.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Edumakated

Agree with your last statement 100%.

Crony capitalism is an issue. Corporate welfare at US levels is dangerously close to overarching socialism.

Actually, it would be closer to fascism where the means of production are in private hands but the state controls how the production is done, but since the private corps in question are actually closer to steering the government mechanism to their benefit then the other way around, we call it corporatism to distinguish it.

Obamacare was closer to a fascist policy then socialist because it left the health care apparatus in private hands, but the regulatory control of said apparatus was so tight, it may as well have been government run in many ways.

Our public education system is pretty much socialist in that the means of production are almost exclusively government owned and operated. Teachers are public employees.

Medicare for all would be a socialist health insurance system, not necessarily a socialist health care system. It would not address cost of care since the whole apparatus would not necessarily be under complete government control, only the payment apparatus would be. We may be looking at a situation much like with college tuition, only for medical costs. Once government pays for all like it does with tuition through loans, there is no incentive anymore to hold costs down which is part of the problem now -- an insurance company has far deeper pockets than any one private individual except the super wealthy.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I'm sick and tired of people making the lame argument communism or socialism is responsible for millions of deaths. The problem with this argument is leaders of every type of government, left or right, have killed millions of people.

I know I'm late to the party, but...

Did you really debunk your own thread in the second sentence?

a reply to: dfnj2015

Are you actually suggesting government policy doesn't kill people...

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm sick and tired of people making the lame argument communism or socialism is responsible for millions of deaths.

Mao's great leap forward STARVED MILLIONS alone.

Futures shares speculation, capitalism at its finest, is starving and impoverishing millions now.

originally posted by: 727Sky

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: dfnj2015

designed in such a way corruption is simply not possible.

It has been tried in every way since man walked this earth and hasn't been successful.
Just read or watch anything about communes or "Utopian" types of communities. There is always, always someone in charge or a leader. There is always someone getting a little more. I think this is just human nature.

In many parts of Africa they have not left the idea of tribalism/socialism... Let me explain.. You are a smart entrepreneur and lets say you found a 100$ bill laying on the ground. There is a need for hammers and axes in your community so you go to town and buy several for resale. You return to your village and do a markup on the items you purchased of some 10 to 20 percent for resale and restock. The next thing that happens is your family both close and far hear you have hammers and axes so they come by and take what they need without paying....because they are family and it is share and share alike....

Some may not believe this example and it is a poor attempt, I will admit, no matter how true however, like I said many of the absolute poorest places still live in the tribal/socialist system and anyone who has a business is not of that tribe and certainly has no family taking from them.. It does not matter if it is tools or food you are gonna give away free stuff until you have nothing left to give. So everyone stays equally poor and miserable.

Small communes/tribes/hunter gathers/where everyone knows each other can work because those who do not contribute are warned and finally told to leave if they do not change their ways and contribute.

And hey. Let’s also extrapolate what the obvious, and ignored, end result of capitalism always is and always will be. Capitalism is about competition, on that we can all agree. In competition there are winners. What happens then? The winners normally buy out the equipment and possessions of the losers, at rock bottom prices, and hire their people. The winners grow, with the largest winners consuming their competition until there is either a small handful of winners, or a single winner. That person then dominates the market, undercutting any startups, or manipulating legislation so that startups can not compete. This is monopolism or oligopolistic. Eventually you have, as we do now, a small handful (about 300) corporations that own almost everything in the world, every business, the vast majority of property, etc. So now we have wars, laws, regulations, all largely decided in corporate boardrooms. There is no defense against them, there is no winning against them. They have all the money, power, and resources. Good job! They also largely control the airwaves, the advertising, the presidential campaigns, and the analytics companies that allow them to program the thoughts of all the nice people here (dicks, mostly) to come and argue against their own self interest while making constant personal attacks, patronizing, ridicule etc against folk trying to have honest discussions or develop their political philosophies.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
Seems to be a lot of evidence on here to show the truth of the old saying that those who fail to learn from the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them or whatever.
Stalin should rank as a pretty big lesson from history.
How is socialism working out for the people of Venezuela?

I think socialism (well, they weren’t even socialist) was working out just fine. Until capitalism got pissed that they weren’t allowing all their profit to be collected by the 1%. So then it cut them off of foreign markets, stole their money, tried to assassinate their leaders, fomented coups, etc.

Let’s look at “capitalism” for a moment. Or really western corporate authoritarianism. Why must it constantly try to assassinate, overthrow, rob, rape, murder or pillage any nation that wants to provide for the many rather than the few? Why is it such a chicken # that it can’t just let other nations work out their own political experiments on their own? If there’s no philosophy involved, then capitalists don’t care how many of your own people you kill. Hell, they’ll even help you do it! If there’s a dictatorship involved they’re happy to ignore it long as they get a cut. But soon as the people are fighting for self determination, fair wages, and a return on their own natural resources, the us and other western powers will go in, kill all the teachers and economists Chile style, initiate a sweat shop economy, set up a nice dictator, and steal all the resources. The joys of spreading capitalism and democracy. Just ask Chile, Panama, Honduras, Iran, Libya, Cuba, Argentina, guatemala, etc, etc.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm sick and tired of people making the lame argument communism or socialism is responsible for millions of deaths.

Mao's great leap forward STARVED MILLIONS alone.

Mao's lack of experience in managing an ecomony, and political one upmanship killed those people, they would likely have died regardless of which system Mao supported.

Incompetence is one of the biggest killers in these situations. Historically speaking, inept leaders are fully capable of killing more people than genocidal maniacs.

Speaking of maniacs, take a look at all of the dictators and despotes that the West supported in Africa and Asia in order to keep the communists out. Or the military dictatorships in South america.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Someone did something. What difference does it make now?

How about if the proponents love socialism so effing much.

They move back in with mommy and daddy that way they don't have to grow up.

Africa's Socialism Is Keeping It Poor

www.zerohedge.com...

originally posted by: neo96
How about if the proponents love socialism so effing much.

They move back in with mommy and daddy that way they don't have to grow up.

Actually more people lived in multi generational homes during the heights of our crony capitalism. Like in the Great Depression, and what have began moving into now, as 47% of Americans live on poverty wages. Strange at a time when us gdp is at its highest. Strange, at a time when all of you say how well the economy is doing. Could it be that the traditional statistics really are only made to reflect how things are going for the wealthy elite, and not the working class?

At any rate, your derogatory statement is exactly what I’m referring to as well as your assumption that the people who disagree with you must not be satisfied with their own lifestyle. I expect this is because you personally don’t understand how some people could be concerned for the situation their fellow Americans may be dealing with, rather than just our own personal interest. Many of us are doing just fine financially, but we have limited tolerance for the injustice that we can clearly see, but you happen to apparently be blind to.

And it’s important to recognize that not only do the us wealthy elite support their lifestyles off the exploitation of our workers, but that the average us citizens also live on the cheap goods supported by the massive exploitation of hundreds of millions of impoverished folks in South America, Africa, China (less so now), India, indochina, and the Middle East. But I expect you won’t grasp this because some lives are apparently worth more than others.

a reply to: dfnj2015

You have obviously never known anyone that lived in the former Soviet Union.

a reply to: Fools

You have obviously never known anyone who resides in Norway.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I have a friend from Venezuela. You can ask her how awesome socialism is. There country went from top of the world to a #hole country in no time after moving to socialism. The lack of readily available common resources lead to many deaths. It lead to many more when the people of Venezuela realized they had made a mistake and wanted things to go back to the way they were before socialism.
Please leave fantasy land, aka- college campus safe space.

originally posted by: JohnProctor
Africa's Socialism Is Keeping It Poor

www.zerohedge.com...

Hey. You’re spot on with this! Just look how socialism affected Libya. For a very short time period they went from the poorest nation in the world to the richest nation in Africa. With a standard of living similar to Brazil’s at the time. With free healthcare, education, rising wages, eradicated illiteracy. They created the newest wonder of the world, the largest irrigation system which was turning deserts to farmland. They built a massive reserve of gold, and were working towards an African Union with a gold backed currency to free the continent from the bondage and slavery of the world bank and imf. Socialism was so bad for them that they got invaded by the us who stole all their gold, destroyed their nation back to # hole levels, and killed their ruler by anal rape with a knife, after he had the pleasure of seeing his children murdered.