Socialist Psychology: There Are Two Kinds of Socialism

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
This touches on the root of your ideology, I think. A distain for your fellow mans intellectual capabilities. You seem to think we are fundamentally irrational, and I, and others, think man is fundamentally adaptive. If raised in decadence and dependance, of course youll end up with a herd of sheep. If allowed to make their own decisions, well, we might just start making our own decisions.

I'm not interested in what you think. I'm interested in what the evidence shows us.

No, your governments monopoly of force makes you buy inefficient healthcare,

I, for one, am very grateful for the NHS- as are the majority of the people of this country.

use inflated and increasingly worthless currency

Untrue. Anybody can operate and deal in their own currency in the UK. They do it in Brixton, for example.

support a welfare state that only perpetuates poverty

Source.

pay for wars that destroy societies including your own

My society is still going strong, although I do generally disagree with war and attended the anti-war protests back before the Iraq war.

buy the largest per capita serveillance state in the world ect ect ect...

I've never understood why people have problems with CCTV in public places.

...but one thing it doesnt do is protect you from buying a 3 pack of jockeys at WalMart.

Again you misunderstand what freedom means.
We don't have WalMart in this country. I'm not really sure what jockeys are, either- where I'm from they usually refer to people who race horses for a living.

So you AGREE that socialism doesnt work in practice?

Why are you wasting our time?

I'm not a socialist.

So what the hell ARE you saying?

As I recall we were discussing your belief in a totally free market.

Would you do business with a militant McDonalds?

Only if I was forced to. It would be in their interests to force me.

A free person CHOOSES to be whatever the hell he wants to be. A government slave tends to become a little apathetic. Afterall, why try if your efforts are confiscated?

Because there are no mental conditions which result in apathy, and there are no factors in your upbringing which can cause you to become more [insert trait here].

[edit on 21-8-2010 by LeftWingLarry]

reply to post by LeftWingLarry


Was going to type a lengthy response and actually figure out the quote function properly, but after a bit of relection and a re read of your post, I decided against it.

Since you believe in the initiation of force is both moral and necessary, we have no basis for discussion. Nothing I could say, in my limited capacity, could convince you otherwise. Youve got it all figured out, I get that.

Since all your bring fourth is fallacy and deflection, I yield to your superior reasoning. Yes, violence is good, for some people at some times. Putting on a green or blue costume totally negates any idea of moral justice. Calling theft 'tax', or 'tithe', or whatever makes it ok. We are all better off with an all powerful gang with the monopoly of violence ruling us all with little to no accountability. Cameras on every street corner a definite plus. Hey, why not in houses, or bathrooms? Lotta crimes being committed in bathrooms these days, dontcha know.

But hey lets take it to the logical extreme! Why not, its headed there anyways. Government shouldnt rule just one nation, but the whole world. Money should be fully digital and controlled centrally. Every dime we produce should be taken forcefully from us by the government and distributed to the most needy, or aggressive, social or lobbying group. We should live in constant state of inflation and boom and bust that constantly trends downwards. There should be endless wars. People should wait 18 months to gt a brain tumor removed that will kill them in 6. Freedom should be a privilege, granted to us by all wise philosopher kings. The masses should bow to their superiors.

Sound good? This is what you support, be it conciously or no. For gods sakes man, consider that you may have been conned on this whole social contract thing.

Total derail, appologies.

Was going to type a lengthy response and actually figure out the quote function properly, but after a bit of reflection and a re read of your post, I decided against it.

Since you believe in the initiation of force is both moral and necessary, we have no basis for discussion. Nothing I could say, in my limited capacity, could convince you otherwise. Youve got it all figured out, I get that.

Since all your bring fourth is fallacy and deflection, I yield to your superior reasoning. Yes, violence is good, for some people at some times. Putting on a green or blue costume totally negates any idea of moral justice. Calling theft 'tax', or 'tithe', or whatever makes it ok. We are all better off with an all powerful gang with the monopoly of violence ruling us all with little to no accountability. Cameras on every street corner a definite plus. Hey, why not in houses, or bathrooms? Lotta crimes being committed in bathrooms these days, dontcha know.

But hey lets take it to the logical extreme! Why not, its headed there anyways. Government shouldnt rule just one nation, but the whole world. Money should be fully digital and controlled centrally. Every dime we produce should be taken forcefully from us by the government and distributed to the most needy, or aggressive, social or lobbying group. We should live in constant state of inflation and boom and bust that constantly trends downwards. There should be endless wars. People should wait 18 months to gt a brain tumor removed that will kill them in 6. Freedom should be a privilege, granted to us by all wise philosopher kings. The masses should bow to their superiors.

Sound good? This is what you support, be it conciously or no. For gods sakes man, consider that you may have been conned on this whole social contract thing.

[edit on 29-8-2010 by Neo_Serf]

[edit on 29-8-2010 by Neo_Serf]

reply to post by Neo_Serf


No extreme is good. Evar. Be it totally unregulated anarcho-liberal capitalism or total collectivism and statism.

To me, the best of both worlds is classical liberalism (which includes government providing cheap basic service alternatives for the poor) + negative income tax based welfare system.

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Sound good?

No, what a stupid thing to say.

This is what you support, be it conciously or no. For gods sakes man, consider that you may have been conned on this whole social contract thing.

No, it isn't, and no, I haven't.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Neo_Serf

 

No extreme is good. Evar. Be it totally unregulated anarcho-liberal capitalism or total collectivism and statism.

To me, the best of both worlds is classical liberalism (which includes government providing cheap basic service alternatives for the poor) + negative income tax based welfare system.

I see where youre coming from as I came from there myself, but I implore you to explore the possibility that this government you propose is actually the source of, and not the solution to, the problems that we all abhor in society today, and yesterday, and likely tomorrow.

I may be wrong, but you may be aswell. If you wish to challenge your beliefs and either strengthen them or discard them all together, here is a good place to start -

www.youtube.com...

After all what good are beliefs if they cannot stand against reasoned critisisms?

Originally posted by LeftWingLarry

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Sound good?

No, what a stupid thing to say.

This is what you support, be it conciously or no. For gods sakes man, consider that you may have been conned on this whole social contract thing.

No, it isn't, and no, I haven't.

You sure showed me the error in my ways! Next time someone approaches me with any kind of question I shall use your 'logic' and simply say 'no' or 'BAD!' Might even drool and stare blankly into the distance!

I da smartest.

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
You sure showed me the error in my ways!

Good.

Next time someone approaches me with any kind of question I shall use your 'logic' and simply say 'no' or 'BAD!' Might even drool and stare blankly into the distance!

I wouldn't recommend the drooling.

reply to post by Neo_Serf


Thanks for the videos, I will watch them when I have enough time. Of course, reasoned criticism is welcomed and needed in forming ones opinion.

reply to post by ghostsoldier

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Less than 2 minutes in, and he thinks the Nazi and Stalin were socialists... *sigh*

FISSION MAILED

Hitler was a marxist, and Stalin was a marxist. I must say what's the difference?

Nazi = National Socialist

Nobody Listens!,Nobody Understands!.

It's all Bull#.

Man Cannot be efficiently governed/farmed.

They have the ability to form their own thoughts which may conflict with your own plans.....

So those who consider,are inconsiderate.

Anywayuall..........

The truth is different to every man....

As I suppose it would be regarding perfection also....

Originally posted by serbsta
reply to post by ghostsoldier

 

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Less than 2 minutes in, and he thinks the Nazi and Stalin were socialists... *sigh*

FISSION MAILED

Maybe you should learn what the NAZI party actually was before making such an ignorant statement and trying to comically denounce the entire OP in one line. You've failed miserable, and whats even more sad is that 4 people think you are right.

NAZI comes from Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers' Party).

Mission failed.

Thanks for sharing the vid OP, thought that was highly insightful. I haven't been a fan of Block's commentary but that was interesting.

Cheers.

He's right Nazi germany was fascist. Not socialist. They were socialist only in name.