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.

 

Revolutionaries are angry at the wrong people.

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


Ponder such...

"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." - John Adams

I know I use a lot of his quotes, but truly a man of conviction and I believe is dead on, especially in terms of what you wrote.

Instilling such trust in words and misuse of words leads to sophistry.




posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


No. Socialism in it's original form, with it's worker ownership of the means of production, sprung forth from the Industrial Revolution's terrible working conditions and oppression of the working class. This idea mainly came from France and England, and drew heavily from Plato's Republic, Thomas More's Utopia and Campanella's City of the Sun, and some early socialist such as Robert Owen transformed these older ideas into the cooperative movement. The cooperative movement continues to exist until today with the flourishing of Worker Co-Operatives across Europe and Asia.


You can also find traces of original socialism in the idea of Distributionism, the 'third way' economic plan invented by various Catholic theologians.

I fail to see how a concept that has it classic literature and philosophy and originated in France and England has anything to do with Mussolini's fascism.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by Someone336]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


Italian fascism advocated workers collectives in collusion with government acting to control production and capital.

I suppose you could say the teachers union acting with government to control public education would be similar to the brand of collectivism advocated by Mussolini.

Mussolini saw industrial unions as the underpinning of his fascist model.



[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



The post office and schools for example are socialist.

Medicare is socialist.

Socialist Security is socialist.


But would you consider these as bad things?



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Someone336
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



The post office and schools for example are socialist.

Medicare is socialist.

Socialist Security is socialist.


But would you consider these as bad things?


absolutely.

medicare is 53 trillion in the hole and socialist security is a massive insolvent ponzi scheme.

you can get 10 times the return of socialist security if you were to make private market retirement investments.

both programs are set to bankrupt the country soon.



[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Technically speaking, there is no difference between what Madoff did and the Social Security system.

None.

The only difference being Madoff was a private citizen, therefore not entitled to loot the public as if he was a government official.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
The United States is a country of the people, by the people, and for the people. Those that wish to subvert and usurp this government are angry for the right reasons at the wrong people.


Your very firs sentence is not true, and I'm starting to wonder if it ever was true.

But as of now... let me correct the first sentence of the OP...

The United States was a country of the people, by the people, and for the people.




Originally posted by whatukno
In 2010 it is your choice, is it going to be the same criminals? Or will the people speak with the most powerful voice they have, the vote, and elect the people to be the people's voice?

Take back our country, take it back with something more powerful than an army of angry militia members. Take it back with your vote. Vote for candidates that truly will be the voice of the people.


Five Problems:

1.) Assassination
2.) Elections are Fixed
3.) Money tends to buy everything
4.) Americans are not very smart
5.) If our votes started to make a difference, They would declare Martial Law after they drop a false flag nuke on us.










I swear to God... Some people seem to forget or fail to comprehend the true meaning of the phrase "9/11 was an inside job"

If they have the power to carry out a job like this... then I can assure you... Your vote will never mean anything.

The quicker you realize you are at war the better...



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Someone336
 


Italian fascism advocated workers collectives in collusion with government acting to control production and capital.

I suppose you could say the teachers union acting with government to control public education would be similar to the brand of collectivism advocated by Mussolini.

Mussolini saw industrial unions as the underpinning of his fascist model.



[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]


I was under the impression that Mussolini had socialist leaders imprisoned or murdered, as well the communist and various labour leaders or organizers. These are precisely the people that would have been involved in the worker collective movement. I'm not saying such a thing ever happened, but I would be curious to see a source about such matters. Either way, this doesn't make the original concept of socialism synonymous with Italian Fascism in any way, shape, or form.


absolutely.

medicare is 53 trillion in the hole and socialist security is a massive insolvent ponzi scheme.

you can get 10 times the return of socialist security if you were to make private market retirement investments.

both programs are set to bankrupt the country soon.


I do agree that systems like medicare and SS need massive reforms, but that is a conversation beyond the scope of this thread that we've already derailed possibly beyond the point of return. But what of people who can't afford to make 'private market retirement investments'. Or take, for example, the police force? Should we privatize that? "Well, we caught the guy who broke into your house. Here's a bill! Must be payed by the 15th of next month!" Should the American citizen be forced to deal with organizing other citizens to pull money together, consider contractors and get roads re-constructed when needed? How about a monthly bill to keep the mail flowing to your house?



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


Socialism is not fascism. Socialist leaders advocated state ownership, again, that's not what Mussolini advocated. He wanted the "corporates" to retain ownership and collude with government.

A good example of Italian fascism would be GM, where the workers unions have extreme influence and public ownership of stock while the government props up the industry by buying its cars and bailing it out of trouble.

Similar to the military industrial complex.

As for medicare and socialist security - if people were allowed to open health savings accounts from birth, by the time they reach old age they would have tons of money in such an account to pay for healthcare. To subsidize this, they would take out high deductible insurance packages with extremely low premiums.

People that were just completely broke and needed healthcare at a young age could be taken care of through charity hospitals, which were abundant prior to the advent of Medicare.

Even today, no one is turned away from a hospital emergency room that needs emergency care - no one. That doesn't require a government program, just a mandate.

Socialist security is a sick joke. It wouldn't be so bad if people retained the money they put into it, meaning they could pass it on to their kids, and if the government didn't suck off it like a leech, but that's not the case.

Its not the governments job to ensure you have a retirement fund, its your job.



[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


I think the 'real' socialism being described by someone336 is what the real powers that be fear, as that would truly give the most power (individual freedom, choice, and responsibility) to the average citizen.

Unchecked capitalism inevitably leads to corporatism, duh. How does corporately concentrated wealth and power equate to individual freedom and liberty? Besides, corporations are just a front to avoid responsibility and cloak the concentration of wealth and power from generation to generation.

How corporations gained constitutional protection is the beginning of the story of how the promise of the USA dissipated.

Best,
Skunknuts

[edit on 1/8/2010 by skunknuts]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



Socialism is not fascism. Socialist leaders advocated state ownership, again, that's not what Mussolini advocated. He wanted the "corporates" to retain ownership and collude with government.


I never said socialism as fascism. I'm arguing quite the opposite. As per "socialist leaders", you're referring to only a certain few who were influenced by the writings of Marx and Engels. I'm referring to the original socialists, such as Robert Owen, Pierre Leroux, Claude Henri de Rouvroy, and heck, maybe even Mikhail Bakunin.

In my previous post, I asked for you to provide a source for Mussolini working with worker cooperatives. I'm still waiting.


A good example of Italian fascism would be GM, where the workers unions have extreme influence and public ownership of stock while the government props up the industry by buying its cars and bailing it out of trouble.

Similar to the military industrial complex.


I agree completely, the "Iron Triangle" is very much a fascism model. But what I'm saying we need a new term to accommodate this new system of "privatizing the profits and socializing the losses"/"lemon socialism" - and I propose to call it "corporatism".


As for medicare and socialist security - if people were allowed to open health savings accounts from birth, by the time they reach old age they would have tons of money in such an account to pay for healthcare. To subsidize this, they would take out high deductible insurance packages with extremely low premiums.


In a perfect world, maybe. But this day in age there are people who don't even have enough money to put into the bank, much like a health savings account.


Even today, no one is turned away from a hospital emergency room that needs emergency care - no one. That doesn't require a government program, just a mandate.


I've seen this thing first hand. The fall-out from the bills that pile up are, for lack of a better word, overwhelming and the toll that takes on a person can be horrendous.


Its not the governments job to ensure you have a retirement fund, its your job.


Hey, maybe I'm just a secret totalitarian wishing for a better world.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Someone336
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Hey, maybe I'm just a secret totalitarian wishing for a better world.


Better than being a closet totalitarian wishing for a worse world. (Tea-baggers waiting for the rapture). BTW, no offense to the true tea-partier libertarians that actually want more individual 'freedom,' however few you all truly are.

Best,
SN



[edit on 1/8/2010 by skunknuts]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


source

www.questia.com...

and

[According to Wikipedia:]"Gentile, described both by himself and Mussolini as 'the philosopher of Fascism', was the ghostwriter of 'A Doctrine of Fascism' which, signed by Benito Mussolini, described Fascism in the Italian Encyclopedia (which was edited by Gentile)."

The problem is that a 'corporate' in Italian of the period is not a business organization. A corporate is a production planning board made up of workers, owners, and others involved in production advocated by the syndicalist school of socialism. Their beloved quote is actually Mussolini (or maybe Gentile) making a connection between fascism and socialism . . .

[Again, Wikipedia]"Historically, corporatism or corporative (Italian corporativismo) is a political system in which legislative power is given to corporations that represent economic, industrial and professional groups."

"Under Fascism in Italy, business owners, employees, trades-people, professionals, and other economic classes were organized into 22 guilds, or associations, known as "corporations" according to their industries, and these groups were given representation in a legislative body known as the Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni."


--------

Corporatism was coined by Mussolini as well. - again refering to "corporates" or trade unions. In today's terminology it has come to mean what you just mentioned, however I prefer to call it for what it is, fascism.

--------

The only reason people don't have enough money is because middle class tax rates are around 40% and the medical system has been socialized with no price controls, rationing, or competition. Socialized care without price controls or rationing leads to insane costs as there is no mechanism in place to force prices down. In a free market, competition forces profits to zero.

--------

People in need of emergency care are never turned away from emergency rooms - never.

--------

You don't have a right to a better life by sucking off my wages and labor. You certainly don't have a right to have the government create a gigantic insolvent ponzi scheme that loots my money and destroys my potential earnings.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 




[According to Wikipedia:]"Gentile, described both by himself and Mussolini as 'the philosopher of Fascism', was the ghostwriter of 'A Doctrine of Fascism' which, signed by Benito Mussolini, described Fascism in the Italian Encyclopedia (which was edited by Gentile)."

The problem is that a 'corporate' in Italian of the period is not a business organization. A corporate is a production planning board made up of workers, owners, and others involved in production advocated by the syndicalist school of socialism. Their beloved quote is actually Mussolini (or maybe Gentile) making a connection between fascism and socialism . . .

[Again, Wikipedia]"Historically, corporatism or corporative (Italian corporativismo) is a political system in which legislative power is given to corporations that represent economic, industrial and professional groups."

"Under Fascism in Italy, business owners, employees, trades-people, professionals, and other economic classes were organized into 22 guilds, or associations, known as "corporations" according to their industries, and these groups were given representation in a legislative body known as the Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni."


Thanks, you learn something everyday.


However, I see nowhere a mention of the actual worker co-operative, with the workers owning the businesses. In fact, your quotes actually state "business owners" and "employees" as separate entities. In original socialism, the employees would be the business owners.


You don't have a right to a better life by sucking off my wages and labor. You certainly don't have a right to have the government create a gigantic insolvent ponzi scheme that loots my money and destroys my potential earnings.


There are other ways to view it: others tax dollars would then cover your medical expenses as well. It's not a completely one sided system. But, as I said earlier, health care is beyond the scope of this thread and it's already been debated over and over and over again on these boards.


[edit on 8-1-2010 by Someone336]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


We don't have a pure system of Italian fascism here today, however our model of large corporations with huge unions colluding with governments through lobbyists and payoffs is close enough that I feel the term fascism is appropriate. Lobbyists are the "Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni"

Corporate lobbyists get huge government contracts, tax breaks, bailouts, etc.. etc.. for their corporations. Of course, this destroys market forces and causes monopolies to form and results in a gigantic mis-allocation of resources.

Its very similar to what Mussolini felt was the ideal system. If Mussolini was alive today he would be proud of our government.





[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by skunknuts
 


Skunknuts you are very true in the how little there are. One of the main reasons I will never identify myself with a movement that has easily been overrun and overtaken by GOP/Democrats (I think both saw a vested interest in it).

I feel for the people that felt they finally had an outlet that would listen and spoke of freedoms we all yearn for only to be given the bait and switch.

Corporatism in how this country has allowed things to happen is where the major downfall began. While corporations themselves are not wholly evil or even bad, its the loop-holes that were engineered into law, and continue to be engineered into law, that allowed the powerful to take advantage.

It nearly goes back to my analogy regarding leadership earlier in the post. Again, we allowed the complete disregard of responsibility to be placed upon anyone.

What really is hard to comprehend, for me, is the balance has been struck, with the best governmental document written to date, but in the hands of man, gives room for the interjection of power and wealth. Once consumed by such forces, very few if any can ever retain a sound mind.

I will contest though, one cannot solely depend on the Constitution, unless one has read the Federalist/Anti-Federalist Papers to know the true scope and nature of the Constitution and meaning.

Maybe one day, we will see a revival of freedoms such as the Law serving Man, rather than Man serving the Law. Inasmuch I speak of how one used to know that they can do anything less it was out of the boundaries of the law, whereas today, one cannot do something unless the law permits. Its a far cry from where we started as a country.

I see it as the poem, The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost. We will continually be presented with two roads. Ponder thy roads, examine them and contemplate them. Know that the road that is taken is a path that we cannot come to again and shouldn't as we have already covered that ground. Nothing will be the same for the choices we make as a Nation today will forever effect our Nation of tomorrow.

Philosophical musing of the day complete....CHECK
Now I just need to check off my passive aggressive deflection for the day


[edit on 8-1-2010 by ownbestenemy]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   
An example of how little it takes for a monopoly to be created by government:

A 1% tax break for a single corporation in a pure competitive market would cause that corporation to become a monopoly.

In a pure competitive market, competition reduces all profits to zero. A one percent edge over the competition would result in that company growing until it took over the entire market, assuming all other factors were equal between corporations in the market.

To highlight this, Wal Marts statistics:
Profit Margin (ttm): 3.34%. Operating Margin (ttm): 5.79%

Giving Wal Mart a one percent advantage in profit margin by reducing its tax burden accordingly would give them a tremendous advantage. They would run Target, Sears, Kmart, and other chain stores out of business rapidly.


Now think about the gigantic government contracts, tax breaks, bailouts, and other incentives that a company like GE gets.

Anyone wanna venture why they are so huge?

Goldman Sachs, another corporate fascist looter - 12 billion in tax free profits through the bailout of AIG.

Praise Stalin.




[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
But hey, lets not stop at the tax example.

Lets move on to regulatory overhead.

Sarbanes Oxley for example.

Say a small firm is competing against a large firm with equal profit margins in an equally competitive market.

Then the government steps in and says the businesses must conduct reporting and auditing, which due to scales of economy, costs the small business more as a percentage of operating costs than the large corporation.

The small corporation is now placed at a large disadvantage.

Lets look at government contracts and lobbyists. Obviously a pre-existing large corporation will better be able to meet the demands of large government contracts. The government will favor large stable producers over smaller ones, given all other things equal. The larger corporation will also be able to afford more in lobbyists given economies of scale. Needless to say, this destroys the competitive market.

And on and on and on.

Government is the root of all evil.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
The thing is that you guys are focusing on the socialization of organizations that are necessary for society, and detrimental when they are privatized. Service industries such as healthcare, police, fire, etc. However socialism also refers to markets, as such, socialism of the oil industry in alaska has allowed all the citizens of that state to profit off the natural resources of their chosen home, so they average $1000 a year from the oil industry each, while the oil company makes its profit as well. Then theres the socialism some countries have done with their oil industry, where the profits from it go to pay for national healthcare and education. In the original ideology of "socialism" it was that....not control of the job in the peoples hands, but rather use of the profits to benefit everyone, to provide for the necessities necessary to stabilize a society...ie: education, healthcare, protection, infrastructure.

The problem we have here is that since our medicine is privatized (and it is, it is a for profit system) then non profitable areas such as natural medicine, that would make a world of difference to the populace, largely go unresearched and demonized, as they would take profit away from big pharma and the ama.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by pexx421
 


Socialism does not work.

There must be price controls - period.

You can not say "everyone gets free unlimited healthcare" and then not set price controls.

Price controls automatically leads to rationing.

Once you fix prices, that means demand will outstrip supply.

This is not debatable, this is fact. This is a fundamental law of nature.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join