Members banned from this thread: Hermes Thoth, SmarterthanYou, USFREEDOM911, cancel2 2022, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Granule, canceled.2021.1, Boris The Animal, canceled.2021.2, MAGA MAN, canceled.2021.3, iewitness, Irish, CFM, Ralph, Wolverine, Sailor, Life is Golden, Bigdog, TTQ64, Getin the ring, zymurgy, Evmetro, Superfreak, PraiseKek, Eagle_Eye, katzgar, Joe Capitalist, countryboy, Tommatthews, volsrock, The Ugly Truth, BodyDouble, coolzone, rhym3pays, LV426, Loving91390, Yurt, Into the Night, Tkaffen, Enlightened One, Anarchon, artichoke, Bobb and lisasanders1964


Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 110

Thread: Big Problem For The Right: 'Socialism' Is No Longer A Bad Word. You Must Now Explain

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Howard the Duck,

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Fascism and socialism both lead to political prisoners and tyranny. Capitalism is as good or bad as your opinion of America and liberty happen to be. Attacking it just shows that you have abandoned liberalism.
    I agree that fascism leads to tyranny.

    I also believe that tyranny can happen under both capitalism and socialism.

    But our differences partly stem from the fact that we have differing definitions for socialism.

    I think Social Security is socialism. You don't, do you?
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  2. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    No, DC is trying to get rid of Maduro after they hit Venezuela with sanctions. Just another in a long list of Latin American countries that America has fucked up.
    The sanctions followed the tyranny and economic fallout. Should we just sit and watch another socialist regime behave like another socialist regime toward its people?

  3. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Howard the Duck,



    I agree that fascism leads to tyranny.

    I also believe that tyranny can happen under both capitalism and socialism.

    But our differences partly stem from the fact that we have differing definitions for socialism.

    I think Social Security is socialism. You don't, do you?
    1) You can't have elements of socialism within a liberal order. You can have illiberal elements, such as progressive policy, just as you can see the numerous instances of corporatism that plague America, even though we are not a fascist state, either.

    2) You can still invest into numerous types of retirement plans, such as IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401k, mutual funds, trusts, etc. The government did not go and take over/ban the private financial retirement planning sector when it established social security.

  4. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Howard the Duck,



    I agree that fascism leads to tyranny.

    I also believe that tyranny can happen under both capitalism and socialism.

    But our differences partly stem from the fact that we have differing definitions for socialism.

    I think Social Security is socialism. You don't, do you?
    Tyranny cannot occur under capitalism, because capitalism is market liberalism. Capitalism can lead to corporatism, which can lead to the collapse of market liberalism, and give rise to a fascist state. This would be properly termed "creeping fascism," the way "creeping socialism" is the slow process of progressivism undermining and collapsing the liberal order.

    In the same manner, political liberalism can become undermined through the democratic process, when it undermines civil liberties and constitutional protections. This is how a republic can be supplanted by an empire. Ultimately, every facet of liberalism can be undermined by an illiberal mechanism, which can lead to a collapse of the liberal order.

  5. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    The sanctions followed the tyranny and economic fallout. Should we just sit and watch another socialist regime behave like another socialist regime toward its people?
    It's not tyranny when the president is democratically elected. And the sanctions came before the economic fallout.
    https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-Liberal-Media

  6. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

  7. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Uh, yeah, Maduro's election was not exactly a clean one.
    No election is, but his was about as clean as the average.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to StoneByStone For This Post:

    iolo (02-26-2019)

  9. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

  10. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    It was about as clean as the average Venezuelan election since 1999, if that's what you mean.
    Democracy isn't perfect. Look at our elections.
    But the point is he did win an election, he's not a tyrant.

  11. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

  12. #56 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Howard the Duck,

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    1) You can't have elements of socialism within a liberal order. You can have illiberal elements, such as progressive policy, just as you can see the numerous instances of corporatism that plague America, even though we are not a fascist state, either.

    2) You can still invest into numerous types of retirement plans, such as IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401k, mutual funds, trusts, etc. The government did not go and take over/ban the private financial retirement planning sector when it established social security.
    It's like we are speaking different languages. I don't think progessivism is illiberal.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  13. #57 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Howdy Howard,

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Tyranny cannot occur under capitalism, because capitalism is market liberalism. Capitalism can lead to corporatism, which can lead to the collapse of market liberalism, and give rise to a fascist state.
    How can corporatism be prevented? They are so powerful already. More powerful than nations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    This would be properly termed "creeping fascism," the way "creeping socialism" is the slow process of progressivism undermining and collapsing the liberal order.
    Your uncommon definitions for liberalism make it hard to follow. You're speaking a different language. And I don't think you are going to get everybody else to speak it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    In the same manner, political liberalism can become undermined through the democratic process, when it undermines civil liberties and constitutional protections. This is how a republic can be supplanted by an empire. Ultimately, every facet of liberalism can be undermined by an illiberal mechanism, which can lead to a collapse of the liberal order.
    We must have laws. Without laws and regulations unscrupulous people will destroy the free market. Therefore, we must have government and we must appreciate it.

    Those who hate government hate law and order.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  14. #58 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Howdy Howard,



    How can corporatism be prevented? They are so powerful already. More powerful than nations.



    Your uncommon definitions for liberalism make it hard to follow. You're speaking a different language. And I don't think you are going to get everybody else to speak it.



    We must have laws. Without laws and regulations unscrupulous people will destroy the free market. Therefore, we must have government and we must appreciate it.

    Those who hate government hate law and order.
    Corporations are not close to wielding the power of nations. Progressivism is illiberal because it seeks, in all facets of society/law/government to undermine the liberal order (like using US courts to undermine the Constitution) and to supplant the principles of liberalism with progressivism. Left unchecked, it will ultimately lead a Western liberal democracy to collapse outright or to transition into an illiberal form of government and order.

    Right now we see the progressive left's contempt for law and order, from incidents like Ferguson to municipal governments having problems maintaining their police forces (like the present situation in Seattle not being able to recruit officers) to the situation with our court system.

  15. #59 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Howard the Duck,

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Corporations are not close to wielding the power of nations.
    I disagree. Today's mega corporations are currently more powerful than all but the largest nations. And their new trade agreements actually hold even large nations responsible for loss of hoped-for profits to the extent that corporations can hold 'trials' in which they find nations guilty for such transgressions as making laws they don't like and then fining the 'guilty' nations. If a nation decides to give labor more power, it could be forced to pay mega-corporations which have been 'harmed.'

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Progressivism is illiberal because it seeks, in all facets of society/law/government to undermine the liberal order (like using US courts to undermine the Constitution) and to supplant the principles of liberalism with progressivism.
    What some call 'undermining the Constitution,' others believe is following their interpretation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Left unchecked, it will ultimately lead a Western liberal democracy to collapse outright or to transition into an illiberal form of government and order.
    Such as in France?

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
    Right now we see the progressive left's contempt for law and order, from incidents like Ferguson to municipal governments having problems maintaining their police forces (like the present situation in Seattle not being able to recruit officers) to the situation with our court system.
    Blatant stereotyping here. Just because some on the left have opposed some law organizations does not mean the 'the left' has 'contempt for law and order.' Hello. The same reasoning could be applied to the right. Ted Bundy. Waco. Trump's many lawsuits for profit against small contractors who only wanted to get properly paid for their work. None of that means 'The Left' has contempt for law and order any more than 'The Right' does.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  16. #60 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PoliTalker View Post
    Hello Howard the Duck,



    I disagree. Today's mega corporations are currently more powerful than all but the largest nations. And their new trade agreements actually hold even large nations responsible for loss of hoped-for profits to the extent that corporations can hold 'trials' in which they find nations guilty for such transgressions as making laws they don't like and then fining the 'guilty' nations. If a nation decides to give labor more power, it could be forced to pay mega-corporations which have been 'harmed.'



    What some call 'undermining the Constitution,' others believe is following their interpretation.



    Such as in France?



    Blatant stereotyping here. Just because some on the left have opposed some law organizations does not mean the 'the left' has 'contempt for law and order.' Hello. The same reasoning could be applied to the right. Ted Bundy. Waco. Trump's many lawsuits for profit against small contractors who only wanted to get properly paid for their work. None of that means 'The Left' has contempt for law and order any more than 'The Right' does.
    Do you think a corporation could defeat a nation in battle?

    Also, no one believes that undermining the Constitution with dishonest and corrupt rulings is "interpretation." It's power politics, and it's not really a mystery to anyone. Also, the efforts, such as those I cited, are becoming more common and much more organized. The supporters of ordered liberty among the left are becoming the true outliers.

Similar Threads

  1. No longer a dirty word? More Democrats call themselves 'liberal'
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-14-2019, 12:14 AM
  2. Replies: 59
    Last Post: 09-16-2017, 02:31 PM
  3. Right Wingers~ Explain Socialism to me
    By Anti-Party in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 144
    Last Post: 11-06-2013, 06:59 AM
  4. Socialism is No Longer a Dirty Word
    By blackascoal in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 12-16-2008, 03:44 PM
  5. Gonzo no longer a problem
    By uscitizen in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-29-2007, 08:04 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •