I was going to make a pithy comment

[tellner]

The telco immunity bill had me up in arms and ready to warm up the Great Amphibian Rant Machine with quotes from the EFF, ACLU, EPIC and everyone else. I was going to excoriate the spineless Democratic Party for caving in yet again to the evil bastards at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who habitually use of the Constitution and Bill or Rights as toilet paper.

Then I read this column by Cenk Uygur. He said it all and said it better. The gods willing we will remember in 2009 and 2010 and replace a bunch of the collaborators with people who have some respect for the Rule of Law and our most fundamental liberties. If there were a "Kicking in the Heads of the Ruling Class Like So Many Rotten Pumpkins" Party they'd get my vote.

 

[Twin Fist]

it is a well written piece.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Wait... YOU...tellner... were going to make a pithy comment... I'm shocked

 

[shesulsa]

Tellner ...

:bow:

If there is an infinitesimal spark of hope that the U.S. Government as it is intended to work actually exists in some tiny, extremely bastardized formand this whole two-party, Them -V- Us, Cowboy Hats versus Booth Tans, Cash-Hoarders versus Bleeding Hearts thing isn't some grand charade designed to sway us all from the idea that Reptilian aliens have invaded and taken over our planet ...

... Every Single Voting American ... Every Single Democratic Elected Office Holder ... Every Single Unregistered Eligible Voter ... Eighteen Year Old ...

... should read that Op-Ed piece.

Who does an abused child blame more; the abuser or the potential savior who allowed it to continue?

 

[Twin Fist]

Who does an abused child blame more; the abuser or the potential savior who allowed it to continue?

I know you didnt mean it this way, but thats a harsh comparison there......

 

[CuongNhuka]

If there were a "Kicking in the Heads of the Ruling Class Like So Many Rotten Pumpkins" Party they'd get my vote.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. 'Welcome to Socialism'

 

[tellner]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. 'Welcome to Socialism'

Well, yeah.

Communism was evil and had to be destroyed.
Capitalism is evil and will have to be destroyed.
What's needed is a system that has room for and serves human beings as opposed to interchangeable units of production or utility meters with pocket books. That pretty much leaves some form of mixed-economy socialism.

 

[CuongNhuka]

Well, yeah.

Communism was evil and had to be destroyed.
Capitalism is evil and will have to be destroyed.
What's needed is a system that has room for and serves human beings as opposed to interchangeable units of production or utility meters with pocket books. That pretty much leaves some form of mixed-economy socialism.

If you want Tellner, we could have a private discussion, and I could explain somethings for you. Or we could discuss this in anouther thread. Or we could drop it. I'll go with what you want.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

When you show me a true free market system, then maybe I will agree with you.

Until then, human psychology, ie. selfishness, trumps my belief in socialism for a heterogeneous culture.

 

[Cryozombie]

What's needed is a system that has room for and serves human beings as opposed to interchangeable units of production or utility meters with pocket books. That pretty much leaves some form of mixed-economy socialism.

Individualist Anarchism, or maybe Market Anarchism

 

[Makalakumu]

I think this country is heading for a civil war.

The government fails to govern and criminals run the roost. I see people waking up all of the time...and I see the government taking actions in order to checkmate those people.

That's the only reason for these kangaroo (fisa) courts and corporate immunity. They want to spy on the American people and not get caught.

I don't know how to fix this civily and lawfully, not when the criminals hold all the levers of power and can disseminate information to the public. If you tune it out, they win. If you fight, they'll use the combined might of all government branches to create an Orwellian police state that no body will see coming.

Meanwhile, the system creaks at the seems and the only thing that protects freedom anymore is the publics ignorance of what is really happening.

 

[Makalakumu]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. 'Welcome to Socialism'

Worst solution to this problem ever. The last thing you want to do when the criminals have all power is give them even more power to run your life. The ironic thing is that the Elite WANT socialism. Freedom isn't pretty, but its much better then corporate slavery.

 

[CuongNhuka]

The ironic thing is that the Elite WANT socialism.

OK, Kyosa, no they don't. I'm kinda getting sick of trying to explain Socialism to people who have already made up there minds, so all I'm going to say to those not open to the idea is the following:

"Socialism means the WORKERS control industry, NOT the government. Because the workers control industry, they automaticly control the Government. Capitilism is where a small number of people control everything. One who would know has spoken, and will not be accepting criticism. One who would know is open to discussion however."

 

[Kacey]

Ideals and absolutes are wonderful when discussing things philosophically; unfortunately, I have yet to find any ideals or absolutes in the real world - this is most particularly true when dealing with government. The reality is that our government is, currently, an amalgam of a variety of systems, the result of decades of compromise between various power groups. To say that one concept overrides the others, or will override the others, is to blind yourself to the interactions between and among systems.

The US system is not functioning the way the framers of the Constitution intended. Nonetheless, it is the inspiration for a wide variety of other governments - and it's what we've got to work with. If you want to change what you see happening in this country - do something - anything - that you see as helping to move the country in the direction you feel it should go. Vote. Support a candidate. Frame and propose a bill, get the signatures, and let the people vote on it. Tell people your opinion in ways that get them to listen.

But don't tell people why they are wrong unless you are doing something about it, something you can prove is having an effect (good or bad) - even when you believe to the depths of your being that they are - because they believe just as strongly that they are right, and you will insult them, which causes them to stop listening, and often to become dead set against your opinion, simply because of the way you presented it.

"A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

 

[Xue Sheng]

That pretty much leaves some form of mixed-economy socialism.

Well there is always China's approach Capitalist/Communism... yup all the good and bad of communism and some of the good and much of the bad of capitalism all rolled into one nice dirty little mess

 

[Touch Of Death]

The telco immunity bill had me up in arms and ready to warm up the Great Amphibian Rant Machine with quotes from the EFF, ACLU, EPIC and everyone else. I was going to excoriate the spineless Democratic Party for caving in yet again to the evil bastards at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who habitually use of the Constitution and Bill or Rights as toilet paper.

Then I read this column by Cenk Uygur. He said it all and said it better. The gods willing we will remember in 2009 and 2010 and replace a bunch of the collaborators with people who have some respect for the Rule of Law and our most fundamental liberties. If there were a "Kicking in the Heads of the Ruling Class Like So Many Rotten Pumpkins" Party they'd get my vote.

Well right off the bat this article is wrong. You need at least 60% support for a bill or you can just call it quits. Thats the way it works, and devising an anti bush bill isn't going to mean squat unless you seduce the republicans into voting for it. This article is therefor... stupid.
Sean

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

OK, Kyosa, no they don't. I'm kinda getting sick of trying to explain Socialism to people who have already made up there minds, so all I'm going to say to those not open to the idea is the following:

"Socialism means the WORKERS control industry, NOT the government. Because the workers control industry, they automaticly control the Government. Capitilism is where a small number of people control everything. One who would know has spoken, and will not be accepting criticism. One who would know is open to discussion however."

Since you are intent on being the resident expert on socialism, tell me this.

What is the current or past socialist country wherein the government did not control industry in the name of the people? In other words, where the people themselves controlled those industries directly, and not through a governmental body.

 

[Sukerkin]

Hmmm ... gets out calculator. What is the likelyhood of an unexplosive debate on the nature of Socialism on a largely American populated internet forum?

{taps keys}

Well, there's a shock. It's close to zero .

I mean no insult to the educated and well-read members of this board when I say that it should be borne in mind that what I, as just a single, non-American, individual, have seen described as Socialism and ascribed to Socialism here does not match what I learned as the socio-economic theories of that name during my time as a student of Economics.

The background of fear and loathing that has been engendered in the American populous with regard to anything that is not Free market Capitalism, makes it very difficult to put across a view that contains the word "Socialist" in it. I've even seen Socialised Medicine cause rampant frothing at the wallet :lol:

Ladies and gents, Socialism is not an Evil thing in league with the Devil. Totalitarian governments using it as a shield for their actions is a fractured paradigm and your rejection of same is justified.

However, Mixed-Economies, which have elements of Capitalism for certain sectors and elements of Socialism for others are the only ones that have a chance of providing for their peoples.

Here in Britain, for quite a few decades, we had a very successful Mixed-Economy within which all the essential services were publically owned and run with an eye to service rather than profit.

In the 80's good old Maggie sold off the lot (hang on, didn't we own that?!) and turned it over to Private Enterprise, which then proceeded to asset strip and profit take until we ended up with the decrepit systems we have now.

Shareholders are not the way to provide electricty, gas, water, hospitals, schools and the miltiary. It just does not work equitably and in the end even the 'Haves' end up with poorer services provided at high cost.

Anyhow, it's late and I'm starting to ramble. Just, please, next time someone mentions Socialism, don't reject anything said out of conditioned reflex. Consider the idea that public ownership of certain essentials of life is actually a better way to provide them.

Utilities Addendum: I can only comment with professional authority on the electricty T & D industry and I have to say that America's 'grid' appalls me. The lack of safeguards and frequency regulation alone makes me wonder how the system works at all - and the control systems ... be thankful you don't know how bad they are.

 

[Makalakumu]

OK, Kyosa, no they don't. I'm kinda getting sick of trying to explain Socialism to people who have already made up there minds, so all I'm going to say to those not open to the idea is the following:

"Socialism means the WORKERS control industry, NOT the government. Because the workers control industry, they automaticly control the Government. Capitilism is where a small number of people control everything. One who would know has spoken, and will not be accepting criticism. One who would know is open to discussion however."

Don't take it so personally. There's nothing to get sick of. People just disagree.

I will say that your description of socialism and capitalism is very limited and has nowhere near the depth that a truly well thought out position should have. Before I continue, I just want to remind you that I've dabbled in socialistic politics, liberalism, libertarianism, and that I've worked for several different parties and supported a variety of candidates with volunteer time. So, I'm not some idiot know nothing coming in off the street.

Socialism isn't some co-op where the workers share industrial components of society equally. Every socialistic country on Earth has state owned industries where the people get their "share" through democracy and taxation. In theory, the people "should" have some influence on how these industries are run. In some cases this is the case. In most, it is not. People in socialist countries piss and moan all of the time about how they are getting screwed. I lived in Canada for a time, I heard it.

I'm not saying that all socialism is bad, per say. Just that the element of control by the "people" is often lacking or not existant.

This, in regards to this thread is especially important, because we are talking about the US, the corruption of the two party system, and my assertion that the Elite WANT socialism.

The key to understanding what I'm talking about is Fabianism. The Fabians have all sorts in their warp and woof AND there are a lot of people in the US, the major financial New York Elite, who may not be Fabians, but they share the general philosophy with them.

The bottom line is this, Fabians operate through the principles of gradualism and they are trying to change society into their version of Utopia.

One person's Utopia is another person's hell, however.

Especially when the bulk of the people that control the government have no respect for the rule of law and are primarily interested in using the forces of governmental power for their own benefit.

Another person I would like to direct your attention to is Leo Strauss. He is the Godfather of Neoconservatism. In particular I want to draw your attention to the concept of the Noble Lie and Deadly Truth. The Straussians believed that some truths were so deadly dangerous that the only way to placate the polis was to invent a myth or a legend or some kind of misdirection in order to create a smoke screen that obfuscates them.

The definition of a "deadly truth" varies and there lies the problem.

Imagine if you combined the Fabian position of a gradual drive towards utopia with the Straussian concept of the Noble Lie? All of this is based on an arbitrary view of both Utopia and Noble Lies, thus there is an inherit bias towards the ideas of the people in power, not the polis that most socialists so readily worship.

At this point in my thesis, Eugenics enters. Eugenics is a philosophy espoused by a cousin of Charles Darwin, Sir Francis Galton. The idea behind Eugenics is to control the heredity of humanity towards a "positive" outcome. This sounds suspiciously Fabian...and it should. Galton and a whole slew of English Elite were Fabians and they viewed Eugenics as a natural pathway towards creating the Utopia that they so desired. The only problem with this is that they veiwed themselves as the pinnacle of human evolution and that everyone else were the dregs of society. Thus the roots of social darwinism were sown.

This philosophy was exported to the US in the late 1800s and was espoused by the major foundations that controlled industry, government, and education. The Carnagies, Rockefellers, Astors, Morgans were all enraptured by the veiw of Utopia and actively worked to create it with all of the levers of government they could control.

The history of the Eugenics movement in the US is shocking to say the least...and its roots are in the very socialists that you seem to revere.

Anyways, overtime, Fabian Eugenics merged with the Straussian political concepts to create a political philosophy that is gradually driving towards a vision of a socialist utopia through obfuscation and misdirection. The left/right paradigm is a myth they concocted based on the dialectic models of Georg Hegel who laid the foundations of Fabian Gradualism with his concept that a Thesis and Antithesis, if both sides were controlled, could be directed toward a Synthesis that satisfies the goals of those who control the dielectic. Strauss' ideas naturally flowed into this matrix.

Thus, I think it should be apparent right now that the elite, WANT socialism. They ARE socialists! What you think you see and what you think you think about certain ideas ARE clever creations by the very people who are directing society toward their vision of Utopia. These are the folks who invented socialism. They bankrolled Marx and Engels all to create ideas that would make their drive for "Utopia" more palatible to the polis.

So, socialism, is NOT the answer to the problems posed by the original poster. Socialism actually makes is easier for the powers that be to control everybody.

That is, unless you are interested in sharpening the guillotine and killing off a **** load of people at the top. I'm talking entire families. It's happened before and thats where social revolutions go. Of course, then you aren't going to want people who can stomach killing a **** load of people for political ideals running the government. We all know where that goes and it only creates another Elite class.

Anyway, its all 1984 and 1776 is the only cure for that...

 

[CuongNhuka]

Since you are intent on being the resident expert on socialism, tell me this.

What is the current or past socialist country wherein the government did not control industry in the name of the people? In other words, where the people themselves controlled those industries directly, and not through a governmental body.

No, I am not the resident expert on Socialism. I'm just the only one here who has actually done something towards understanding Socialism, other then reading propaganda from the CIA/FBI.

Define 'control industry' and we can go from there. But, if all you want is to argue, then you can bugger off. I will not argue with people.