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.

 

Why many Republicans hate Europe and lie about the situation there?

page: 5
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Republicans see themselves as hard working and independent (true or not)

They see Europe as an antithesis of this (especially southern Europe) because when they go there on there lavish vacations they notice people there have more free time and don't seem to be on a rat wheel.

They also notice these people live pretty well even though they don't work there rear off I think.

Then they come back to USA and are jealous. Rather than saying they are jealous they say the Europeans are lazy and get everything for free.




posted on May, 28 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Instead of agreeing to disagree, how about you actually read some of Marx and other socialist authors? Your arguments are not based on what socialists said or wanted, it's based on the misunderstandings created by the right-wing establishment press (there is no left-wing in MSM).

This is socialism, not what happened in Russia, or China etc...

flag.blackened.net...

struggle.ws...


edit on 5/27/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)


Because my gut feeling tells me all or most of it is BS and I hate wasting my time. My definition of right is individualism and the right to private property(which in essance is libertarian and in the extreme is anarchy) and the definition of the left is the collective. To enforce a collective you need rules and authoritarianism.

Then you call socialism and communism the same thing and say anarchy is the direct path to socialism/communism, while marxism is the political path.

None of this makes sense to the majority of people.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 


“He wants us to turn into a European-style welfare state,” warned Mitt Romney. Countless versions of that horrific vision creep into Romney’s speeches, suggesting that it would “poison the very spirit of America.”

Rick Santorum agrees, fretting that Obama is “trying to impose some sort of European socialism on the United States.”

Yet there is something serious going on. The Republican candidates unleash these attacks on Obama because so many Americans have in mind a caricature of Europe as an effete, failed socialist system. As Romney puts it: “Europe isn’t working in Europe. It’s not going to work here.”


Article from NY times: Why Europe is a Dirty Word?
www.nytimes.com...


WestSideRepublicans homepage category:

Socialism – Lessons from Europe. What socialist expirimentation in Europe teaches us.




There is one party today talking about socialism and Europe and that is the GOP. Every time you turn on a debate or listen to the latest GOP primary candidates talking point inevitability the talk of socialism and Europe comes up. The GOP seems obsessed and preoccupied with socialism and Europe


progressiveperspective.newsvine.com... ocrats



"We will run an American campaign," Newt Gingrich proclaimed to Republicans in Palm Beach, Fla., on Saturday night, framing this distinction with Obama: "I am for the Declaration of Independence; he is for the writing of Saul Alinsky. I am for the Constitution; he is for European socialism."

In only slightly less dramatic language, Mitt Romney frequently describes the coming election as a battle for "the soul of America." As he told voters here Friday, they must choose between "a European-style welfare state" or "a free land."


articles.latimes.com...



It has been a long time since Europe has featured so prominently in an American presidential race. Republicans, in particular, have seen the crisis plaguing the Eurozone as an opportunity to attack president Obama, who—they claim—is leading America away from its core values and towards the sickly collectivism prevalent in the European Union


prospect.org...


correct three misconceptions that are running through the straw-man concept the Republicans call “Europe”: that there is a single “European” model instead of many different national models, some of which the United States could benefit from emulating; that the fundamental cause of Europe’s troubles is “socialism”; and that President Obama is a closet collectivist who aims to turn the United States into a European-style social democracy.


www.realclearpolitics.com...


The GOP’s ‘Europe’ is a land of make-believe.Lately it seems that not a day goes by without a Republican presidential candidate portraying Europe as a socialist nightmare. Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum paint a picture of the Old World as unfree, strangulated by bureaucratic and inefficient welfare systems, and unable to reform and modernize. To these Republicans, Europe seems to be the antipode to everything America is meant to be.

articles.washingtonpost.com...


Professor James Walston, who claimed that "the candidates are dealing in caricatures of Europe that are about 90% wrong."One of the things that amuses people here is the GOP candidates' insistence on referring to Europe and European socialism, as if they were talking about a single amorphous entity- when, in fact, the European Union alone comprises 27 different countries, each with its own language, culture, and social system."

www.mrc.org...

www.slate.com...

www.bbc.co.uk...

Right winger Matt Kibbe:

The difference between America and Europe, and why America is so great, is that Europe has ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’.”


www.youtube.com...

How is that not lying? Most people identify socialism with communism, very negative word. Even associating that word with different EU nations is lying/misinforming the public . Europe is far-far from being socialistic. People have the same if not even more rights and opportunites... There are no have´s/have-nots compared to us. Even blaming social policies for crisis is BS to be honest...










edit on 28-5-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by BenReclused
Until now, I have never known Europe to be "portrayed" in such a broad, and all encompassing, fashion. Where did you get that from?


These are the words that come up with the word socialism, which is widely used with the word "Europe". Europe has been portrayed as not being a land of free, but being socialistic and we all know how negative word socialism is... During the elections Europe turned into a dirty word...


I don't feel posts "which are based on biased assumptions" are, in the least bit, rare on ATS! Your post is highly biased!


If I told you America was socialistic, wouldn´t you say I am lying? It is the same situation only from my perspective. It is not biased, as I have lived in Europe most of my life, while you have lived in US probably. Both of us speak from experience, as we know our areas are not socialistic. It is not biased when one states facts.



Well... I'm not particularly fond of your misinformed portrayal of The Republican Party as being a bunch of misguided morons, either.

Google/Youtube for different articles/vids about Republicans talking about Europe during last elections. I am not the only one who noticed the misportrayal of Europe, there are far too many people like me. These are misinforming in order to gain more votes. I have never implied Republican Party as misguided morons, although any person who actually believes European nations are socialistic is one...
edit on 28-5-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Communism is 100% public economy with 100% welfare state. Socialism is a mixed economy with a welfare state. Liberalism is a private economy with a welfare state. Conservatism is private economy with no(or very small) welfare state.

Of course we also have social and religious issues. The people who take religion seriously are right wing individualists and the people who do not are left wing collectivists. People with business mindset are right wing individualists and people who are worker orientated are center or left.

I am generalising, so therefore many variations exist, especially with small parties that are non-mainstream.

Western europe no longer has a mixed economy(half public sector and half private sector) therefore there is NO MORE socialism in europe. It has become liberal like the USA! I am tired of people confusing liberalism with socialism. I see many "left wingers" doing it as well so I can't blame only the right!

edit on 28/5/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by juleol
 


So all of Europe's problems are the fault of the US and not their own overspending and bloated government programs...

mmmhmmm

Or perhaps better stated, a global economy and government mechanism causes the entire ship to go down. Not a very good case for centralized control.


The problem with socialism, unlike communism, is that the central bank is privately owned by the rothschilds and other billionares and trillionares, therefore it it is not a true collectivist society. It is a socialist economy funded by a capitalist class(bankers).

Most people do not know this. Evil people keep things secret so that they ensure victory for themselves and failure upon others.


edit on 28/5/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: add video



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   


An exaggerated propaganda video but still it has many kernels of truth to it.

edit on 28/5/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by flexy123
 





I can tell you that the US is not even *remotely* (say: REMOTELY) nowhere near what rights we have


Perhaps that really depends on what your definition of "rights" is. To a social democrat, a right denotes the right to have a job, a home, food, clothing, cars (or maybe bikes in some places) and whatever else at the expense of the state. To a conservative, a right means private property rights acquired through personal work, and the right to life and liberty, the right to express discontent against government tyranny, and such.

So which type of rights does the EU have?


I have all those rights.
I have free healtcare, free education, a home, a car, even a bike and a dog.
I can buy what I want with money. If I want to buy a private property Ill do it. I can speak out my opinions without fear. I can live my life exactly as I want. I have a big enough salary to do what I want, even after taxes.
I can even watch a picture in the newspaper without it beeing cencored. We dont have delay on live TV for editing out whats inapropiate (superbowl nippleslip anyone?).

Granted, I do not live within the EU, but as close as you can get due to agreements.

Whats the incometax in the US btw? I pay around 30% with around 97K USD yearly income.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 11:33 PM
link   
In short, because republicans seem to hate everyone they disagree with, which is most of the world. Republicans hate the blues states, celebrities, nature conservatives, the list goes on and on.

One thing I like about this thread is that it is like a list of republican mythology.

Someone needs to go through and collect all these myths and put them all together in one thread and debunk them. Maybe I can put up such a thread this weekend if someone doesn't beat me to it.

Statements like, Liberal are tax and spend! What a joke, Republicans are Tax, Borrow, and Spend it all.

Look at what the Reagan admin did, and the two Bush admins. I can hear it now, oh, but Obama! The 2009 budget was the last budget of the GW admin.. The Obama admin has cut deficit spending, after inheriting the worse economy since the Great Depression.

The red states are the poor states in the U.S.. Texas has a high tech center, and it is Liberal.

Most of these neo-conservative were taken by the con of the free market, after being alienated by the racist (and classist) attitudes of the liberal elites who currently run the democratic party, and are now starting to face the reality that they have been conned into supporting a system that put the bankers in control, against their own best interests.


edit on 28-5-2013 by poet1b because: Complete last paragraph.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
Yeah well people love Europe so much they are free to move there, but nooooooooooooooo they want to turn the US into Europe, they have done such a bang up job so far.

Have people forgotten just exactly how, and why this country was founded?

Because they got sick of Europe.

And please stop putting words in 'republicans' mouths and the situation is not that great.

The massive nanny state is a fact.
The record debt is a fact.
The failure of multiculturalism is also a fact given last week news.

Carry on with the hyperbole by all means,.


Nobody is putting words in the republicans mouths...they do it all themselves. As it looks now...America is becoming a cesspool of corporate greed, and corrupt politics. Our forefathers would have escaped to Europe if they were around today. You have blinders on my friend if you think the "liberals" are dragging this country down...it's apathy and two part bickering and religious nuts.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Originally posted by Cabin
reply to post by BenReclused
 

Right winger Matt Kibbe:

The difference between America and Europe, and why America is so great, is that Europe has ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’.”


www.youtube.com...

How is that not lying? Most people identify socialism with communism, very negative word. Even associating that word with different EU nations is lying/misinforming the public . Europe is far-far from being socialistic. People have the same if not even more rights and opportunites... There are no have´s/have-nots compared to us. Even blaming social policies for crisis is BS to be honest...


How is that not lying?

That's not lying because what you quoted is only a portion of the OPINION that he expressed in the video. At the end of the video was the justification for that OPINION. Was his assertion of French unions not wanting to hire young Muslims a lie? If not, that certainly lends credence to his OPINION.

Most people identify socialism with communism, very negative word.

That identification wasn't made in the video, and the only negative thing mentioned about socialism was when he quoted Margaret Thatcher:

The only problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

Can you really deny that there ARE some countries within Europe that ARE MUCH MORE SOCIALISTIC than the United States?


Even associating that word with different EU nations is lying/misinforming the public .

That is only a VERY subjective opinion on your part, and I certainly don't agree with it.


Europe is far-far from being socialistic. People have the same if not even more rights and opportunites...

Europe is not a country. Some countries within Europe are more socialistic than others. All countries within Europe tend to be more socialistic than the United States. Hell, even Canada is more socialistic than the United States! Socialistic only means that there is a tendency toward socialism. It DOES NOT mean that a country is socialist. Furthermore, one country in Europe is, indeed, considered a socialist republic.


Even blaming social policies for crisis is BS to be honest...

That's not being honest, at all! Hell, the ONLY CAUSE for CIVIL WARS has ALWAYS BEEN "SOCIAL POLICIES"!

I'll try to address your continuance a little later.

See ya,
Milt



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Europe has been portrayed as not being a land of free but being socialistic and we all know how negative word socialism is... During the elections Europe turned into a dirty word...

No it hasn't! That's only a perception that you gained by accepting too damn many OPINION PIECES as statements of fact.


If I told you America was socialistic, wouldn´t you say I am lying?

Nope! I certainly wouldn't! The United States does, indeed, have a number of "socialistic" policies. I would only say that America is not as socialistic as many countries in Europe.


It is the same situation only from my perspective.

No it's not! See my statement, above. You shouldn't make so many assumptions!


It is not biased, as I have lived in Europe most of my life, while you have lived in US probably.

Where we have lived has absolutely nothing to do with why I called your OP "highly biased". I called it biased because it relies ENTIRELY on OPINION PIECES that reflect negatively on The Republican Party.


Both of us speak from experience, as we know our areas are not socialistic.

From MY EXPERIENCE, every place that I have lived has had at least some "socialistic" policies. My many "homes" have included Japan, Canada, Spain, Germany, and the good old USA.


It is not biased when one states facts.

You didn't state any facts in your OP! You only expressed an opinion that was only supported by BIASED OPINIONS.


Google/Youtube for different articles/vids about Republicans talking about Europe during last elections. I am not the only one who noticed the misportrayal of Europe, there are far too many people like me.

I agree! "There are far too many people like" you! You should learn to interpret statements on your own, instead of relying on someone else to tell you what they meant, and why they were said.


I have never implied Republican Party as misguided morons

Bull scat! Your questions are damn near a statement to that effect:

What are the reasons behind their misinformed messages? Just politics and getting more votes from less intelligent people?



although any person who actually believes European nations are socialistic is one...

Before you start calling me names because of YOUR IGNORANCE, it would be a pretty damn good idea to dig your dictionary out, and look up the word "socialistic".

See ya,
Milt



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by BenReclused
Nope! I certainly wouldn't! The United States does, indeed, have a number of "socialistic" policies. I would only say that America is not as socialistic as many countries in Europe.


What are "socialist" policies?

Socialism is the workers ownership of the means of production, an economic system.

There are no socialist policies, only economies, and if the workers do not own the means of production it is not socialism, or socialist policies. America has a capitalist economy, industry is primarily in the hands of private entities.

The "socialist" programs you refer to are liberal programs, and...

"Liberalism is not socialism, and never will be" - Winston Churchill

A capitalist economy with a social safety net is neo-liberalism.


In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, a group of British thinkers, known as the New Liberals, made a case against laissez-faire classical liberalism and argued in favor of state intervention in social, economic, and cultural life. The New Liberals, which included intellectuals like T.H. Green, L.T. Hobhouse, and John A. Hobson, saw individual liberty as something achievable only under favorable social and economic circumstances.[6] In their view, the poverty, squalor, and ignorance in which many people lived made it impossible for freedom and individuality to flourish. New Liberals believed that these conditions could be ameliorated only through collective action coordinated by a strong, welfare-oriented, and interventionist state.[16]


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


What are "socialist" policies?

You seem to have difficulty reading! Perhaps, corrective lenses are in order. I said "socialistic policies" as in:

The United States does, indeed, have a number of "socialistic" policies. I would only say that America is not as socialistic as many countries in Europe.



The "socialist" programs you refer to are liberal programs

I didn't refer to any "socialist programs"! I will, however, agree that Liberals do, indeed, tend to like socialistic programs.

See ya,
Milt
edit on 29-5-2013 by BenReclused because: Typo



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 


I have no problem reading mate, I think you have a problem comprehending.

What you and that link describe are not "socialist" programs, there is no such thing.

Socialism is an economic system, not social programs provided by the state. That is liberalism.

Social programs are not socialist programs. Social does not mean socialism, one is a characteristic of living organisms as applied to populations of humans and other animals, the other is an economic system whereby the workers own the means of production.

Europe is not socialist either, they have capitalist economies just like America, they are just more liberal.

What happened to deny ignorance, did people forget that's the motto of this website?




edit on 5/29/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


I have no problem reading mate, I think you have a problem comprehending.

What you and that link describe are not "socialist" programs, there is no such thing.

Then why is that YOU have such a difficult time seeing the difference between the words "socialistic" and "socialist". That's certainly not a problem with my comprehension.

The truth is:
You are only trying to change the word I used because you're not honest enough to try to argue against what I actually wrote.

See ya,
Milt
edit on 29-5-2013 by BenReclused because: Typo



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 


Why are you shouting?

Socialistic implies socialism, not social. They are called social programs.


socialistic

so·cial·is·tic
[soh-shuh-lis-tik]
adjective
1.
of or pertaining to socialists or socialism.
2.
in accordance with socialism.
3.
advocating or supporting socialism.


dictionary.reference.com...

I think you already knew that though, didn't you?


And just for reference...



social
  Use Social in a sentence
so·cial
[soh-shuhl]
adjective
1.
pertaining to, devoted to, or characterized by friendly companionship or relations: a social club.
2.
seeking or enjoying the companionship of others; friendly; sociable; gregarious.
3.
of, pertaining to, connected with, or suited to polite or fashionable society: a social event.
4.
living or disposed to live in companionship with others or in a community, rather than in isolation: People are social beings.
5.
of or pertaining to human society, especially as a body divided into classes according to status: social rank.


dictionary.reference.com.../

Social does not imply socialism, or "socialistic programs or agendas".


edit on 5/30/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:26 AM
link   
I haven't been able to find a socialistic angle to the french system- I mean there is a multi-payer national healthcare system- but it just pays the private organisms (hospitals and doctors..). The capitalist economy has always seemed to be a balancing influence to the social culture - this is refering to a cultural force of values and ideals, not a official legitamized set of laws and systems. This is an important distinction in my mind.

But as I was sitting here reading this, it hit me that there is one area in which the people DO consider they own it, and that is recognized legally -

the government itself.

The people speak of how much they pay politicians, transparency is required, they do not hesitate to push back laws, or actions the government undertakes that they do not accept, the regular french citizen considers themself the employer of the government. They still use the word "civil servant"- even in regard to the President.

I just realized that in that way, I guess you could call that some sort of socialistic thing. The people owning the government......

Why do some people not want that?
Perhaps some politicians wouldn't want to lose their status as "powerful" to "servant"?

Some citizens don't want to rise to "employer with responsibilities" from "powerless victimized worker"?
(I mean, "powerless", in our culture always travels hand in hand with innocent or blameless...)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Even the people owning the government is not socialistic, or socialism.

Socialism is not a political system, it's an economic system.

Really the reason we have government is because of capitalism. Capitalism requires a state to legitimize the private ownership of economic systems. Without the state enacted right to use private property to deny people of the means to produce, there would be nothing to stop people just appropriating land and saying screw you private exploiter.

I mean capitalism started by the state enacting laws, on behalf of the land owners, that changed common law. The "inclosure acts" started in Britain in 1750, which allowed land owners to inclose, fence off, their land and deny it's use. Took about 150 years for all land in Britain to be enclosed. Prior to that Britain operated on common law, which based land ownership on use, if the land was unused anyone could access it to hunt, grow crops, fish, build a house. The enclosure acts took away that freedom, and introduced the system of capitalism.

They created an economic system based on exploitation of people, who are not free to live on the land they were born on. Forced to take "jobs", exploited to increase the economic power of the capitalist class, the land owners, or economic private property owners.

If you understand what we lost, you will understand how our freedom was removed, in order create a 'working class' to financially empower the capitalist/ruling class, who use the government to keep them in power and us always at the mercy of their system. That is why wealthy families go back centuries sometimes, because their system keeps those who have at the top, and those that don't at the bottom. Individuals can make it out of this, but not communities, or the lower classes as a social whole. Which in America, and other western nations, is mostly minorities.


edit on 5/30/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Even the people owning the government is not socialistic, or socialism.


Well, I know it is not the traditional interpretation- that sort of has been established that under the strict meanings of the word socialism, it does not exist in european countries (they all have capitalist economies and private property).

I just was stretching it a bit to see where things could possibly be misconstrued as socialism, and the best I could find was the people owning the government itself- social ownership of the means of production for laws and regulations!

In the US, people express the attitude of being submissive to the government, whereas here, people express the government as being submissive to them.
When I first moved here, I had a repulsive reaction to that (as if it was undisciplined lack of respect for power), but with time, I have started to kind of see it differently- especially because that sense of power includes an equal sense of responsibility with it.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join