DOH! It's About SOCIALISM !!!!

page: 7
5
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by zedVSzardoz
 

Right, a balancing act and that is what was learned by the globalists from the american experiment.

Rule by proxy and find a balance that keeps the people from revolting. Then create the UN and spread it worldwide.




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


I don’t see how you made that connection to what we were talking about. They mask corporatism, like fascism under whatever the people favor and use incremental changes to develop the master design.


Are you saying:
The far left, like the far right is a tool of fascism where every facet of life is regulated and supervised by an all encompassing government.

And
the muddy waters of huge government through regulation and oversight creates large public expenditure in private corporatists´ hands that no one can tell apart from their intended economic model.

?

If so I agree.

The UN does all that.......BUT, the plan was thought up in Bavaria and done so hundreds of years ago...the details were always circumstances permitting. Like not letting a crisis go to waste. Today shootings are used to make a push for gun bands, like tomorrow a biological weapon used helps push global disbanding of all armed forces to be replaced by a world army and security force....in the name of peace of coarse...
edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
EDIT;
Also what are you judging as a success. The US was not in debt and could easily grow in the 18th and 19th century since it was an agricultural country with room to expand into industrialization. If success lies in maintaining growth and sustaining your economic presence globally, then corporatism has failed where capitalism did not.

The success of free market capitalism would the absence of the need for government involvement. That was not the case.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


but the government interfered when the people asked it to so as to protect them from abuses. Before they did, things were going well. One of the things people asked the government to address was the need for child labor laws for example, which really were needed. They just didn’t stop there. It should have been local where the abuses were being perpetrated. These regulations seemed to be such great ideas it seemed logical to make them federal law and implement them nation wide..... DUMB....like no smoking, or a gun ban.....or seat belt laws...or fireworks bans, or drug bans, or what ever huge "noble" undertaking leftists deemed to be great and necessary for EVERYONE to implement. Fascism under the pretense of "greater good"

People need to learn that asking government for anything is a Pandora’s box....better left unopened. We should do for ourselves and solve our problems together.

DIY for life.....

edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: ADD



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by zedVSzardoz
 

but according to proponents of free market capitalism these abuses should have never happened. They did, pointing out the error in the theory.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


There is no guarantee to anything. Also the "abuses" were blown out of proportion so as to sway public sentiment. No different than anything else we see done today....need a war, then say WMD´s are everywhere....need to raise profits on tobacco and taxes, then make smokers into passive murderers...need to pass laws to censor the internet´s free information, then make people into "CYBER pirates", thieves for sharing, ect

Use the puppets heart strings.....and so continue marionetteering Uninterrupted

edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by daskakik
 

The UN does all that.......BUT, the plan was thought up in Bavaria and done so hundreds of years ago...the details were always circumstances permitting. Like not letting a crisis go to waste. Today shootings are used to make a push for gun bands, like tomorrow a biological weapon used helps push global disbanding of all armed forces to be replaced by a world army and security force....in the name of peace of coarse...

I agree. I was saying the the US model worked the best and was their winning move, even in the early "freer" version.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


I can agree with that....

EDIT:
Lets see how the EU turns out when it is finally federalized and each country becomes a state in it, LIKE THE US...lol

The EU army will then become the world army by the way....

I wonder if a new royal title will be made?
They all have monarchies with the exception of France right? Will they then nominate a European monarchy to "figuratively" represent (yeah right) the new unified territory, or will they be monarchs of each little state I wonder?

edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by daskakik
 

There is no guarantee to anything. Also the "abuses" were blown out of proportion so as to sway public sentiment. No different than anything else we see done today....

The proponents of free market capitalism stand by the idea that the invisible hand does guarantee against these kinds of abuses and that companies will self regulate because it is in their best interest.

You yourself have said that certain regulations were in order, so even if the government did go beyond the point where it needed to, there was a legit reason for government becoming involved. I mean the Cuyahoga River is said to have caught fire 13 times from how polluted it was, which led to the creation of the EPA in 1969. The first was in 1868 so there was over 100 years for the polluters to self regulate.

Of course you are right that they will not let any opportunity go to waste to move the agenda forward.


I wonder if a new royal title will be made?

I think royalty is on its way out. The younger royals don't even seem to give it much importance these days. They have been replaced by parliaments which are pretty much the same as congress.

edit on 26-12-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


well in the real world there are no guarantees. If I was to go to another form of political/ economic ideology not providing its guarantees I would argue every form of socialism in which unions exist. In a true socialism the workers own their own production so the need to be defended from abuses is null, yet unions always exist in socialism under the hidden form of corporatism known as syndicalism. That is not socialism either, it is syndicalism (corporatism) existing in socialism until it ultimately undermines the whole system.

The same is true of capitalism with the parasite of corporatism. Those abuses we speak of during the industrialization process that the US underwent were full of government interference which made those businesses untouchable. The people did not enjoy them and would gladly seen them ousted, the same way we would gladly oust the banks today. The problem is that they are utterly protected by the same government and system that is supposed to directly/ or self regulate them. That is yet another attribute of corporatism that goes unnoticed.

Also I dont think that royalty is on its way out. It is in a perfect position to control governments while avoiding all blame for failures as well as dangers of public backlash. They still do hold absolute power in most cases. Like in Spain the King has veto power over the government that he rarely publicly exercises, but COULD.

edit on 27-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by daskakik
 


well in the real world there are no guarantees. If I was to go to another form of political/ economic ideology not providing its guarantees I would argue every form of socialism in which unions exist. In a true socialism the workers own their own production so the need to be defended from abuses is null, yet unions always exist in socialism under the hidden form of corporatism known as syndicalism. That is not socialism either, it is syndicalism (corporatism) existing in socialism until it ultimately undermines the whole system.

True which is why I have no problem discussing ideas as they appear on paper but don't advocate anything because the human element always finds a way to make things go in another direction.

I guess Mussolini was different because the fascists put it out in front that you were going to be controlled with a certain amount of personal freedom.


The same is true of capitalism with the parasite of corporatism. Those abuses we speak of during the industrialization process that the US underwent were full of government interference which made those businesses untouchable. The people did not enjoy them and would gladly seen them ousted, the same way we would gladly oust the banks today. The problem is that they are utterly protected by the same government and system that is supposed to directly/ or self regulate them. That is yet another attribute of corporatism that goes unnoticed.

Yes but die hard capitalists don't want to acknowledge that it is a real and reoccuring problem. If you look at the territories in the US before they were states I bet that the heads of industry where the ones just begging to form a state and join the union.


Also I dont think that royalty is on its way out. It is in a perfect position to control governments while avoiding all blame for failures as well as dangers of public backlash. They still do hold absolute power in most cases. Like in Spain the King has veto power over the government that he rarely publicly exercises, but COULD.

They do all of that in the US without being in the public eye which lessens the dangers of backlash even more. It's just a better system from that point of view.

edit on 27-12-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join