It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Please explain Socialism to an idiot.

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 06:10 AM
What an entertaining thread. All those (US) contributors who hate socialism but haven't a clue what it means. Brilliant. I noticed the usual brain dead statements have appeared about stealing from the rich, taxes is stealing etc etc. Only in America is such nonsense spoken with such passion. I wonder where it comes from?

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 06:28 AM
This is a pictorial representation of Socialism - simplified, but accurate nonetheless:

This is what ALWAYS happens when Nations adopt the Socialist System, which is also Always Totalitarian (very bad, see below):

*I Hope this has helped you understand Socialism. I cannot further simplify things anymore than I just have.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 06:31 AM
I direct you to my current thread "What is Socialism" here:

For a detailed presentation of just what socialism is and what it is not.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 06:39 AM
socialism is

creating so many taxes and rules and regulations that no one can afford to get ahead of their own hard work and effort. small business becomes a thing of the past because it can't survive the plethora of taxes, permits, licenses and other red tape, designed to take their money and give to someone else. which has already happened. thus the era of superstores and the end of mom and pop stores.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 07:15 AM
Lets have a look at a few well known socialists throughout history:




They had/have a huge personality cult who's followers are blind to the true monsters they were and are.

Sound familiar?

In the states, socialism enslaves citizens to the government, or more accurately, the owners of our government, the Federal Reserve.

Q: What does "Spread the Wealth" mean, anyway?

How about spreading some of that wealth, BO?

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 07:56 AM
Sweden is an example of socialism that works very, very well. Same with The Netherlands to some extent. If you have never travelled to these countries, you should go see for yourself.

I'm afraid that would be difficult since the American working people aren't even allowed a decent vacation. Sweden, Norway and Denmark have a right to a four week vacation each year and also vages to make it possible to go places. The only travelling experience the regular American worker has a chance to experience is by joining the army and going to Afghanistan or Iraq. But hey . . . the return fare is already arranged for . . . in a body bag.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 07:58 AM
reply to post by feydrautha

Again you are spreading the urban myth that poor people are lazy. I linked to a study earlier that makes it clear that poor people are only poor because they didn't inherit a fortune.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:07 AM

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by Buck Division

Buck, if I came to your house and "took" your TV by force, would that not be theft?

Is your TV your property?
Is your home your property?
Is your computer your property?
How about your car?

Now. How about your money. You earned it. It's yours. Your property.

No one argues that taxes must be paid to contribute to roads, bridges, monetary system, government agencies, the military, and other things we all benefit from as a people.

But to force one damned dollar from one person to enrich another is called robbery. Theft.

No one should have their personal property, either in the form of real property, or any other assets, including cash, to be taken from you to benefit another.

No. It's forcible theft. Stealing.

forcible theft huh? and you would be the type of person who would pay someone 50 cents to do 10 dollars worth of work, with you keeping the difference...wrong am I???... go check how much theminimum wage would be now, if it had kept pace with inflation over the last 40 years

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:30 AM
reply to post by Buck Division

No one should have their personal property, either in the form of real property, or any other assets, including cash, to be taken from you to benefit another

Exactly . . . which is why Bill Gates get to keep his money so that YOU have to fend for yourself when you get sick or disabled.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:53 AM
reply to post by norskie

Please don't compare Universal HealthCare to Hardcore Communism.

There is no comparison. America could have such a system if it reallocated just ONE percent of it's annual defense budget.....

[edit on 2-11-2008 by TruthTellist]

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 09:22 AM
reply to post by aaa2500

i tried to start a business but the cost was outrageous. later, i tried for a smaller business but by then, there were so many new rules and regs and required permits, that i couldn't start that either. soon i realized, i would never be able to start any size of business, regardless of whether i was poor or middle class. the only people that would be able to successfully open a business and keep it going, would be people who already had so much money that having their own business would be just a matter of preference of what they did with their free time. in fact, they are the only ones that could keep a business going in this economy and with the amount of burden put on business owners. many prospective business owners are just poor folks trying to make a way for themselves, who are locked into poverty by the system

[edit on 2-11-2008 by undo]

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 09:25 AM
reply to post by TruthTellist

if they reallocate 1 percent of their defense budget it will come out of the pockets of the poorest members of the military (because they represent the biggest chunk of expenditure.. more non-commissioned than commissioned members). this essentially drives them into poverty level wages while requiring them to do the most dangerous job on the planet. not a good idea. if you are going to have a mililtary, and require they do dangerous work, and fill them full of dangerous chemicals, you really should pay them a living wage.

[edit on 2-11-2008 by undo]

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 02:59 PM
reply to post by LogicalExplanation

"If he does this, people will no longer want to try hard and become wealthy themselves, since their money will just be taken any way."

I don't believe this at all. I am not saying that socialism is the way, but there were many many "rich" people under Russia and even Hitlers socialistic government.

I believe there are many types of socialism. Russia being a Corporate/Militarized Socialism, Nazi Germany a Dictatorial Socialism, and, what seems to be our governments path to Democratic Socialism.

This is just my view, I could be wrong and probably am, but what I see is the so called rich that earned their "hard earned money" reaped it off the disenfranchised, by exploitation of them!

I do not support either candidates, but Barack seems like his "socialism" is a way to help the poor and middle class achieve and take back what has been taken from them by corporate America.

And lets not forget that the way they would "take" the hard earned money from the wealthy is to tax them, and we have the choice to file our income tax returns. If enough people would just stand up and not let this illegal tax take place, there could be great reform of our economic policies. I don't see this happening soon, but when enough people are fed up with their money being taken illegally and inform themselves of the facts of income taxing great things could happen.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 03:16 PM
Your question is quite general, and although others have already replied extensively, this might be a shortcut with some insight.

Socialism in theory is pretty darn close to early Christian brotherly love. however, any second coming in socialist form has been ipso facto averted by the Illuminati using that name for something entirely different, namely the state fascism which they have in store for us and which they tested at length in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba and North Korea among others.

So one would do well to be wary of anything purporting to be socialist, as it often isn't really very socialistic in motive or in consequence. To help you distinguish between genuine socialism - whatever that may be worth - and its hijacked namesake, here is a link to a fairly advanced training textbook on the Psychopolitics of Social Engineering under the guise of Socialism/Communism. Enjoy the read, and remember we're already living several chapters of that dream at this very moment...

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 04:46 PM

Originally posted by cognoscente

Originally posted by Pjotr
In Holland we seem to be the most productive per head per year, but we work less hours, so we are more effective. You would call outr country socialist (left from Obama), but we still don't, so it is a matter of perspective. The American dream is still an option in Europe. Strange HUH.
So we work harder in a smaller amount of time and are RICHER per head. also when you pay taxes there is a reason to work (I know, I work hard, earn a lot and am sill very happy, and proud to be contributing to one of the healthiest econimies of this world)

While that may be true, I'd just like to note that everyone in Europe is forced to take long holidays; that is what produces the lower level of working hours. And so when you compare what remains of work hours with those of countries such as the U.S. and Japan, you come to a substantially biased figure of productive output. However, the holidays might help efficiency in the long run. Holland and other closely related European countries may produce at much higher levels of the intellectual output than those of the aforementioned workaholic countries. So the difference between the two systems is either too subtle or untranslatable to give a fair perspective of differences in both societies in terms of levels of industrial and other producible outputs.


Look, the bottom line is that any political body truly does not take into account the well being of its citizenry. It will, however, make exceptions for its constituency, but then only the minimum in order to remain in power. The political body is only interested in preserving and strengthening in its own power base. This has been true for all of human social history. So the fact that a voter in this upcoming election would be torn between either party, on the basis of some feigned sense of Socialism and how it would apply to that individual directly, is being completely mislead. I'm not entirely sure how each party differs in their social policies, but I know the Republicans at this point in time simply aren't capable of providing any sort of social welfare to its national constituents. They just aren't in the position. The party itself isn't unified over the issue. Actually, if the Republicans do manage to make it into office this term, we can expect to see some violent infighting among the party, which could manifest in the 2012 election. The event might conjure images of Teddy Roosevelt and Taft, with the formation of a progressive Republican party, ultimately culminating in Republican defeat that election year. Actually that happened in 1912. Spooky connection anyone? The formation of a progressive Republic base seems to be occurring at this moment.

What hurts the most is that an individual will vote for some party based on ideological principles. This is absurd. ......

People that vote on ideological principle alone are either rich and bored, or poor and complacent. They need to something to fill themselves, to grasp on to, which could potentially fill the void where the individuality of a person usually resides.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by cognoscente]

Thank you for your intelligent response. I agree on almost all points (be it that vacation is of course not forcedi Holland, it is possible in a lot of situations to lose your vacationdays if you just don't spend them and further you free to work on other stuff in your vacation, I am a entrepeneur, so I work a lot more than average because I love it. How this influences the graphs I don't know). I tried to put some of your thought in words in other threads. As it is not my native tongue, I am not able to put it so eloquently. I like your vision of progressive republicans.

The major point you touch -and I think that it would be worth a thread on its own- is the notion that we (ATS-ers from all around) carry all these political ideas an terminologies with us and vote for them while that is sort of cruelty against reality in itself, and of course these ideas obviously mean or represent different things in different countries, loaded with all the cultural biases that we carry in our own countries.

Instead of talking about the nineteenth century terminology we should try to work with other words that are not yet powerbased, but are kind of neutral, like central control vs decentral and personal initiative vs hierachial control. Welbeing of all vs welbeing of nr1. These are counterpoints of dynamics that play a strong role in all the old political ideologies.

I noticed while visiting corporate global leaderclasses and such as a outsider that these terms are used a lot to get a grip on what is happening in the world.
Leading question:
How do you financially steer in a world where you cannot see the future.

First you have to set the desired future with images you know.
For that you would use extremes like the given values. For instance you do not want total centralization or total decentralization, because they both carry to much negative connotations. And if you are really good at it, you do not want to compromize. So how do you reach your optimum getting the best out of both?

In a way politics does this FOR people. They depict the situation, the set up the desired future, and they tell you they know the way to get there, which they obviously don't. But before you get this, they have filled you with all the obstacles you will have to conquer (your enemies), for instance "socialism" or "welfare", people eating or spending your money or people buying firearms whatever it doesn't matter, you are lost. They set the standards of your thought level, while all you want is to be happy ...which would only mean normally: some friends, some work you like, some food you like, a little money to spend...learn something new etcetera..

I is not that difficult to achieve and if we just would learn to behave, it would be achieved.

To come back to your phrase:"The political body is only interested in preserving and strengthening in its own power base"

In principle that goes for any "body", but that does not mean that there are certainly people with a littel more weight in the conscientious mode. Mostly theze types get tired after a while being in politics, some hold on for a long time. I have seen and met a few, and they are something to witness. Don't give up on them.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 05:05 PM
reply to post by red 5

I swear. Why don't you do some research before you make assumptions? What is being practiced in Alaska regarding oil company profits was put into law there back in the 70's, long before Palin becamse governo. Basically, Alaska told the oil companies that, if you want to drill for oil in our state you need to give us 25% of your profits. The oil companies agreed.

That's not socialism.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 05:16 PM
reply to post by red 5

Others have explained it better then I could. Basically, Take from the Haves by force and Give to the Have Nots and watch people become Lazy suckerfish.

Socialism is not a Destination Government. It is a transitional government system, a bridge or elevator to Communism. Get the people Lazy and Greedy expecting someone else will pay for them, then make them distrust the government even more, BAM! an catalystic event to cause massive chaos and distrust in the Government, then Mr. Communist Government jumps in and says "I can solve this, you just need to cast your vote this once! I can put an end to all this anarchy!" Communism is voted in only Once!, and like a breeze, your rights vanish in the wind of change.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 07:26 PM
reply to post by red 5
WOW -2798 why do I feel like you are just being facishis(SP) you have no doubt made a few people mad.

If you are serious look to George Soros who's idol is Karl Popper,Soros is Obamas daddy(and very big supporter) witch you will all find out soon.Anyway if you look up Karl Popper it will give an explanation of all sorts of Socialism.

-2798 I love it.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 07:53 PM

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:45 PM
reply to post by red 5

can you tell me whats its called when hard working americans have to
give up 700 billion dollars to a bunch of crooks &robbers whom has done more damage to this great country then any terrorist will every do &
people are becomeing homeless our young men and women being killed
in an war for profit to these same people want to bring about a new world
orderof slavery to this country and at this time is makeing the amero &keeping secrets that are not in our best intrest please give me a brake
with all this talk about the rich loseing a frew dollars get real and wake up
to whats realy going on

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in