You say Glenn Beck and other right wingers don't want us to know Thomas Paine was a socialist, yet there is a Glenn Beck video specifically talking about how Thomas Paine was a socialist that is in the similar videos and it was made 1 year before this video here. Guess the truth doesn't matter? lol It's called Promoting Socialism with Thomas Paine by BestofGlennBeckRadio
@Handrober So I listened to that video. He just incriminates himself. Because in other talks on TV, he has used Thomas Paine in quite the opposite fashion. And he wrongly attributed a quote by Benjamin Franklin to Theodore Roosevelt. I swear, every time that idiot opens his mouth he proves what an imbecile he is.
@AwwCrap66 Its because they really don't represent or even like the things Paine actually stood for. And Americans seem to think that Paine was a far righty themselves after having been told that by the idiot Glenn Beck and other far right morons.
@ninjapirate0507 Did you even read Agrarian Justice? In it he supports private property which he calls "artificial property". The reason land doesn't fall under that (and therefore is communal property) is because people didn't create it. Even with that belief his solution isn't collectivisation, but a compensation tax to be paid to both poor AND rich. You mistook an usual view of property rights as socialism because you paid too much attention to the outcome and not the substance of the theory.
@samtheman152009 No I am not a democrat. I am now a member of the Communist Party USA. Most of the time in the US we have little choice as the two party system has a monopoly on power in the US.
@ninjapirate0507 We have a three party system in the UK but the voting system is so corrupt it completely snubs the third party. It's OK though, because we have a mainstream socialist party. Glad to hear there are some American communists trying to keep the balance of the political spectrum. Do you fear saying you're a socialist in public?
@samtheman152009 I don't fear it , in fact I am quite open and outspoken about it. There is though a great deal of hate and vitriol that comes when I tell people my political persuasion. They will say I hate America, I should move to Cuba/Sweden/Russia etc. if I like socialism so much, I should not have the right to speak these views, I am committing treason etc. Pretty ridiculous. People here have little ability to think for themselves.
He also thought that the earth belonged to everyone and that if someone wanted to have exclusive access to a peice of land they should have to pay rent to the community in order to compensate them for the loss of that property.
@CoolDude8675309 We do? Oh right. Like no more kids working 12 hours a day in factories, better upward mobility, Universal healthcare, Workers rights, womens rights. Turned out pretty well if you ask me. IF you are talking about their current financial problems, look how much money their politicians wasted on bullshit for themselves. That was the problem, not the democratic socialism
Womens rights and child labor reform were all a production of the Victorian Era and acheived before the Second World War. Worker's rights. Workers rights were also gained during this time and improved due to technological advances. Same for the United States. And if you count the government's missallocation of resources and housing as upward mobility, then yeah, that really defines "upward mobility." ...
If anything socialism halted upward mobility and left people in dead in jobs and enough money for families to barely support themselves. There is a reason why England is moving away from a more Fiscally liberal form of government, quite simply because it does not work. And as for Universal Healthcare goes, it is inefficient because there is no competition and quality control. The government is held unaccountable for the Health Care provides.
Health Care quality has decreased in the USA with the creation of Medicare and Medicaid, both of which are going bankrupt. Same goes for Social Security. The English government is a hell of a lot better off relatively speaking ever since they made reforms.
@CoolDude8675309 Its funny just how wrong you are. Social Security actually is running a SURPLUS. Our dumbass government just borrowed from it until it was gone. Next, either cite proof as to how medicare has badly affected healthcare in America, or STFU. Baseless claims get you nowhere.
Yeah, which is the nature of GOVERNMENT. There is rarely enough funding for any of these programs because the government is simply to incompetent to manage finances. Which is why it does not work. People should not have to pay taxes for something they would rather not have, and should be able to use that money to have their own savings. Medicare is the same way. And yeah, it is so typical for the side that is losing to tell the other side to STFU.
I just love the snobbery and egotism of the far left. Most neither realize nor care about their actions. It is all about their pretentious image. So typical. Usually the ones that claim to care most for the "little guy" are the most mean spirited people you could find.
@CoolDude8675309 Wrong wrong wrong. Right now there is an article in the Economist about how UK school children are doing progressively worse on education. The conservative's answer? Raise tuition for Universities and cut funding. Result: Riots in the streets of London. The "Victorian Era" has nothing to do with it, other than that people wanted to stop the abuses of it. To ignore the socialist movement and how it changed the world is willful ignorance.
No, and everything I said is correct. And the state controlling tuition is a liberal policy, not a conservative. The reasons why tuition is so high is because all of the funding that goes to it. American Universities are having the same problem. The more funding a University gets, the less incentive the Universities have of lowering their prices. This is because they are going to get students anyways due to the government, so it raises the price for other students.
And I am in no way ignoring the socialist movement. I am very aware of the movement, and I do not support it because it has a history of failure. The privatization of industry almost always leads to a better product and better pricing. This is because the government cannot manage shit. And of course the other side is going to riot.
@CoolDude8675309 The other side does not agree with the policies of the other, so they are going to act like a bunch of baboons and scream until they get what they want. Throwing money at schools is just as dumb as Bush's "No Child Left Behind."
And speaking of distorting history, why don't you tell the story of the meeting and influence of people like Adam Smith and Benjamin Franklin, and the liking Franklin had for him. Or about the founding father's influence from people like John Locke and other private property advocates. Of course you won't, because that doesn't fit your agenda.
@CoolDude8675309 And you are misquoting Thomas Paine in a major way in "The Agrarian Justice." He was not talking about socialism, which was an idea which had not gained much recognition from the writings of Plato all the way up to Marx's writings. He was a known advocate for private property rights, but simply saying that since it was man's ownership of the Earth which distinguished him, that it was up to the private property owners to pay money to the non-holders. This is NOT socialism.
@CoolDude8675309 He was merely speaking of compassion to the poor, not socialist policy. If anything, the American Conservative gives a lot more to charity than the standard Liberal does. Now tell me where the compassion lies. For the record, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, because I think both parties have disenfranchised the people and their human rights.
Ninja Pirate; you'll find this particularly interesting. Perhaps a return to the study of political science is in order. Just a suggestion.
Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
3 : a stage of society in MARXIST theory TRANSITIONAL between capitalism and COMMUNISM and distinguished by UNEQUAL distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
(Emphasis, Mine. Oh, but this must be the CAPITALIST Randian Fantasy definition.)
@dbentzen: I am fully aware of all the possible uses of the word socialism. You'll notice that they are not the same. The term socialism predates Marx, You can't pick and choose, and decide which definition applies to me.
@ninjapirate0507 Which definition would you prefer? Government ownership and administration of production means has been a failure. A system of society or group living in which there is not private property or the means of production are owned and controlled by the state has been a failure, and Capitalism, cum Socialism, cum Marxism has been a failure.
I leave the choice to you. I believe the choices are failure, failure and failure.
@dbentzen: As I said before, I am a Democratic Socialist, and that has been a great success. Socialist ideals have changed the world in monumental ways forever, and no matter how many times you want to chant "failure" it will continue to help make the world a better place. Free market economy and deregulation failed in the great depression, and thanks to Regan it's failing again. Capitalism builds a house of cards that in the end comes crashing down.
@ninjapirate0507 A more accurate study of history will show that the great depression was actually caused by regulation. Actions by the US Federal Reserve that contracted the money supply, and Britain's decision to return to the Gold Standard at pre-World War I parities were huge factors. Also, the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act and retaliatory tariffs in other countries exacerbated the collapse. Hmm.... Regulation.
Next, a lesson in the 'affordable housing' house of cards, pun intended.
Reagan: Congress established the Low Income Housing Tax Credits, 1987
Clinton: National Homeownership Strategy, in 1994 Clinton and HUD's Henry Cizneros came up with a number of "creative measures to promote home ownership."
So, blame Reagan if you like, I blame Congress, they legislate. Clinton's initiative and NINJA loans are the cause of the housing collapse. You cannot sell homes to someone with No Income, No Job and No Assets (NINJA) It's doomed to failure. So much for government regulation. I see failure.
Outside of Scandinavia, whose countries are pretty much run by the Lutheran Church, which I suppose is socialism (at least it's sorta benevolent) can you give me examples of success with Socialism?
@dbentzen: I have a lot to debate with you, unfortunately I am really busy right now, and have no time to formulate a detailed response. I will get back to you, but it will be later, so hold on, don't worry, I will show you where you are completely wrong soon.
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
I like to believe I think for myself. I also read a great deal and believe history is full of twists and turns. You haven't mentioned the demise of Thomas Paine and why he ended up penniless. I believe we can select among the good points discarding those that don't work from among all of the works of Paine and others who founded this country. I also believe you might have to reach back even further to Rome, Greece and other sources of government by the people. Historically, socialism fails.
@dbentzen: I didn't mention it because it has nothing to do with his political views. His attacks on religion, such as "Age of Reason" were not received well in a time where religion was still a very powerful force in society. Historically socialism has succeeded greatly, no more child labor, no more deadly working conditions, equality in Europe etc. I think you need to keep reading.
@ninjapirate0507 Perhaps I should say socialism as an economic system has failed often. I agree with your points on child labor and working conditions, but economically on much greater than a local level redistribution of wealth removes incentive.
I worked on a kibbutz in 1973. The more socialized it became, the more the society degraded. Some work, others don't. As time goes on, even such things as garbage collection broke down.
Other examples: E. Germany, USSR, more recently Greece...
@dbentzen: Whether left or right, if one removes democracy from the equation, the sum is tyranny. That is why E. Germany and the USSR did not work. Greece is a democratic country, but it was only recently that the Socialist party came in to power and they even started austerity program causing riots... I don't believe in Communism. I do believe in democratic socialism. When the people who created the wealth share more in it, we will have a more prosperous society.
@ninjapirate0507 This is not to say that we should throw out all socialistic ideas. Being a libertarian leaves me somewhat socially liberal but fiscally conservative. I also believe that the road FDR was following became very unpopular with a majority of the electorate, especially toward the end of his term(s).
Also I believe in taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves. So I don't disagree with everything socialist. Just it's economic failures.
@ninjapirate0507 Socialism becomes especially distasteful when it is combined with fascism. Examples of this are Musollini, Hitler and Franco. Mix Obama with Bush and you have a recipe for disaster.
@dbentzen: The only thing Socialism has in common with fascism is the concept of controlled economy, and there the similarities end. Mussolini, Hitler and Franco were not socialists in any sense of the word. They were corporatist, meaning fascist. Fascism is the exact opposite of socialism, and yes it is right wing.
@ninjapirate0507 So, here's my problem. Your claim that socialism has nothing in common with fascism is untrue. Socialism is corporatist. The fed bank, the TARP takeovers, and GM are proof that we are becoming socialist. I don't really understand the allure such a diabolical form of government has on the hearts and minds of so many people these days. It sounds really good on paper, but truly doesn't work because it is so rife with fascism.
@dbentzen: Socialism is not at all fascist. There is a huge divide between socialism and fascism. If you knew the first thing about political science you would know this. Fascism is not in the least socialistic.
@ninjapirate0507 You're funny. The divide between socialism and fascism quickly closes as more and more discrete rules are applied to socialism. You're welcome to live under the rules of someone who knows what's best for you. I prefer freedom. Here's how benign socialism becomes fascism: I'll leave it to you to patch this together: you tube com watch?v=OEDk9o3fxuI
@ninjapirate0507 You said: "When the people who created the wealth share more in it, we will have a more prosperous society." Patently untrue, we will have a LESS prosperous society, those who create wealth will lose the incentive to create wealth, wealth will disappear.
@dbentzen:What you said is only true if you live in an Ayn Randian fantasy. I live in the real world. When you want to discuss reality, not the plot of a stupid Ayn Rand book, try again.
@ninjapirate0507 Funny again. Yes, I'm a bit of a Libertarian, but certainly not an anarchist. Also when you start calling names, you begin to lose the debate. If you're going to call someone or something stupid, you ought to refer to facts to back up your opinion. Debate 101.
This IS fun though. Also, I may have a slightly separate reality from yours, but I base my findings and opinions on historical fact, not fantasy. Your arguments give away your naivete and your youthful enthusiasm
@dbentzen: Where did I call you a name? Where did I say you were an Anarchist? You know you are losing an argument when you have to construct a strawman fallacy to try to claim "victory". Your line was straight out of an Ayn Rand characters mouth, which is why I made the connection. Economic equality does not mean less for everyone, what you said was completely false, and you have nothing to back it up with, yet you just want to be condescending. Do you have anything of substance to argue?
@ninjapirate0507 Ah, the straw man defense. You didn't call me a name directly, just referred to a 'stupid' book. And I didn't say YOU called me an anarchist, I just said I'm Libertarian, which indicates I agree with some of what Ayn Rand wrote. Just clarification of my point about both Ayn Rand's tales not a straw man. I state I am a Libertarian EXCEPT for the absence of an anarchist bent. You were the one to bring up Ayn Rand. There's the straw man.
@dbentzen: You said I had called names. I did not. Libertarianism and Anarchism are two separate things, and we're not discussing Anarchism. I did not make a strawman as what you said is Ayn Randian therefore not an assumption on my part.
@ninjapirate0507 Oh, but I thought you were a student of political science. My mistake. The concept of pure Libertarianism relies on the removal of all government and rules; hence in it's pure form is identical to anarchy. I am only a lower case libertarian and don't go as far as the total anarchy some of my purist friends advocate.
How did Ayn Rand enter this debate? You brought her up. When you did, I clarified. But I Digress. Read my comment about Socialist Republics and carry on.
@dbentzen: And if you were, you would know that Libertarianism is right wing, while Anarchism is usually a left wing ideology. Libertarianism is capitalist, whereas Anarchism is usually socialist or non statist communist in it's ideology. Pure libertarianism would not be Anarchism at all.
@ninjapirate0507 I have only history to enforce my debate. As you watch the socialist republics collapse (Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, there will be more) you'll begin to see what I'm talking about. As capitalism becomes constricted, and socialistic rules are applied, capitalism begins to break down.
My goal? To work toward removal of rules that don't really work for me. Your goal may be to work toward creating rules for me. Good luck with that.
@dbentzen: The problem with those countries was capitalism, not the socialism. If you wanted to argue that why are you not putting more capitalistic nations on the list of those that have failed? For you a somewhat leftist government falling means all leftist governments are inherently flawed, yet rightist governments and economies failing means that capitalism is working. I find your position to be disingenuous. Continued..
Why are you not mentioning France and their stellar performance in this whole world wide economic downturn? I think you don't mention it because it does not support your argument.
@ninjapirate0507 Don't get me wrong, youthful enthusiasm is a great attribute. However, age and wisdom beat youth and enthusiasm every time. Oh, and when I was your age I was an avowed communist. Che Guevara was my hero. Then I spent time in Romania under Ceausescu, Yogoslavia under Tito and the Deutsche Democratik Republic, which you might know as Communist East Germany.
They were just simple Socialist Republics where dictators took their despotism a little far.
@dbentzen: Your political history and anectdotes have little meaning for me. There will be others your age who have a history opposite yours and it proves nothing. I am not talking about communism, nor am I advocating it or any kind of totalitarian government. I am a advocate of democratic socialism, not Che style revolution. As I have said many times, if the democratic element is removed the government is a tyranny.
@ninjapirate0507 I'm not sure how someone could have an opposite history from mine, I was there. I don't think you're following my argument, when I said there will be more, France will follow, so will Germany. The socialists in these countries must blame someone. They, like you, believe it is capitalism that is causing their failure.
If either France or Germany return to their own currency, their respective republics will fail also. It's not capitalism, but socialism causing failure.
@ninjapirate0507 And I argue that adding Socialism to the equation indeed REMOVES the democratic element. Socialists create rules governing things they know nothing about, like economics, engineering, science, technology, and weather. Socialism seeks to control that which cannot be controlled. By doing so It fails. Or the rule makers create their own fairy tales about how things work as in Global Warming, er, um, Climate Change, er, um, Weather.
@ninjapirate0507 I just can't wait for your reply. I love to write! I use to type at nearly 100 WPM, But I've gotten old and lazy with the advent of these new fangled computer thingies. Now I type backwards as fast as I do forward. But still at 80 WPM...
@ninjapirate0507 And yes, it's obvious my political history and amusing historical anecdotes have no meaning for you. You probably do a lot of dreaming. I did when I was your age too. I still do. I'm here simply to encourage you to think. I KNOW I'm not going to convince you of anything. I couldn't be convinced either. At first...
You all do realize our president FDR during the WW2 era was a democratic SOCIALIST who won a war, improved our economy, and was going to introduce a 2nd bill of rights which gave everyone freedom regardless of color or creed also he was going to give everyone health care. He died before he could do it during his term and yet everyone worships this time in America's history but neglects this idea of him being a socialist. All these scare tactics are funny as fuck because they are lies.
@NewRevolutionLeader : I do realize all of that, the question is, does America realize it? Many don't. Many have been lied to by Faux News and Glenn Beck. That's why I am getting the word out.
Yes, Fox News are some racist capitalist pigs who spend their time downing socialism and showing hitler as the leader of it. Hitler hijacked socialism because socialism was started by a German (most likely Jewish) named Karl Marx and he created this well before the Nazi party. Glenn Beck is a nut case who screams and cries like a little girl every show. He cries for that couple of million he's thrown like a bone. Socialism as a economic and foreign policy works.
Great video! It makes me sick whenever I hear Glenn Beck proclaim that they follow the principles of Thomas Paine when in fact, he follows the principles of Reagan and Bush and Goldwater.
You say Glenn Beck and other right wingers don't want us to know Thomas Paine was a socialist, yet there is a Glenn Beck video specifically talking about how Thomas Paine was a socialist that is in the similar videos and it was made 1 year before this video here. Guess the truth doesn't matter? lol It's called Promoting Socialism with Thomas Paine by BestofGlennBeckRadio
Handrober 4 months ago
@Handrober So I listened to that video. He just incriminates himself. Because in other talks on TV, he has used Thomas Paine in quite the opposite fashion. And he wrongly attributed a quote by Benjamin Franklin to Theodore Roosevelt. I swear, every time that idiot opens his mouth he proves what an imbecile he is.
ninjapirate0507 4 months ago
Ask the politicians in DC,,,especially the republicans,,,why is there no statue of Thomas Paine in Washington DC
AwwCrap66 11 months ago
@AwwCrap66 Its because they really don't represent or even like the things Paine actually stood for. And Americans seem to think that Paine was a far righty themselves after having been told that by the idiot Glenn Beck and other far right morons.
ninjapirate0507 11 months ago
@ninjapirate0507 Did you even read Agrarian Justice? In it he supports private property which he calls "artificial property". The reason land doesn't fall under that (and therefore is communal property) is because people didn't create it. Even with that belief his solution isn't collectivisation, but a compensation tax to be paid to both poor AND rich. You mistook an usual view of property rights as socialism because you paid too much attention to the outcome and not the substance of the theory.
BloodskullMannoroth 1 week ago
Well done, ninjapirate0507. It's so refreshing to hear an American who's not afraid of praising socialism without calling it "progressivism".
samtheman152009 1 year ago
@samtheman152009 There are more of us than the right wants to admit. We are growing in power and strength. The right is just running scared.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Who do you find yourself voting for come election time? Surely not Democrat?
samtheman152009 1 year ago
@samtheman152009 No I am not a democrat. I am now a member of the Communist Party USA. Most of the time in the US we have little choice as the two party system has a monopoly on power in the US.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 We have a three party system in the UK but the voting system is so corrupt it completely snubs the third party. It's OK though, because we have a mainstream socialist party. Glad to hear there are some American communists trying to keep the balance of the political spectrum. Do you fear saying you're a socialist in public?
samtheman152009 1 year ago
@samtheman152009 I don't fear it , in fact I am quite open and outspoken about it. There is though a great deal of hate and vitriol that comes when I tell people my political persuasion. They will say I hate America, I should move to Cuba/Sweden/Russia etc. if I like socialism so much, I should not have the right to speak these views, I am committing treason etc. Pretty ridiculous. People here have little ability to think for themselves.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
He also thought that the earth belonged to everyone and that if someone wanted to have exclusive access to a peice of land they should have to pay rent to the community in order to compensate them for the loss of that property.
sewbuttns 1 year ago
@sewbuttns Kind of a communist idea dontcha think? I believe he talked about that in his work "Agrarian Justice"
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
Btw, to call Glenn Beck a true libertarian is absolutely ridiculous. You obviously cannot discern what he says from what he actually is.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507
Yeah, and we all know how well Democratic Socialism worked in England.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309 We do? Oh right. Like no more kids working 12 hours a day in factories, better upward mobility, Universal healthcare, Workers rights, womens rights. Turned out pretty well if you ask me. IF you are talking about their current financial problems, look how much money their politicians wasted on bullshit for themselves. That was the problem, not the democratic socialism
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507
Womens rights and child labor reform were all a production of the Victorian Era and acheived before the Second World War. Worker's rights. Workers rights were also gained during this time and improved due to technological advances. Same for the United States. And if you count the government's missallocation of resources and housing as upward mobility, then yeah, that really defines "upward mobility." ...
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309
If anything socialism halted upward mobility and left people in dead in jobs and enough money for families to barely support themselves. There is a reason why England is moving away from a more Fiscally liberal form of government, quite simply because it does not work. And as for Universal Healthcare goes, it is inefficient because there is no competition and quality control. The government is held unaccountable for the Health Care provides.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309
Health Care it provides*
Health Care quality has decreased in the USA with the creation of Medicare and Medicaid, both of which are going bankrupt. Same goes for Social Security. The English government is a hell of a lot better off relatively speaking ever since they made reforms.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309 Its funny just how wrong you are. Social Security actually is running a SURPLUS. Our dumbass government just borrowed from it until it was gone. Next, either cite proof as to how medicare has badly affected healthcare in America, or STFU. Baseless claims get you nowhere.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507
Yeah, which is the nature of GOVERNMENT. There is rarely enough funding for any of these programs because the government is simply to incompetent to manage finances. Which is why it does not work. People should not have to pay taxes for something they would rather not have, and should be able to use that money to have their own savings. Medicare is the same way. And yeah, it is so typical for the side that is losing to tell the other side to STFU.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309
I just love the snobbery and egotism of the far left. Most neither realize nor care about their actions. It is all about their pretentious image. So typical. Usually the ones that claim to care most for the "little guy" are the most mean spirited people you could find.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309 Wrong wrong wrong. Right now there is an article in the Economist about how UK school children are doing progressively worse on education. The conservative's answer? Raise tuition for Universities and cut funding. Result: Riots in the streets of London. The "Victorian Era" has nothing to do with it, other than that people wanted to stop the abuses of it. To ignore the socialist movement and how it changed the world is willful ignorance.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507
No, and everything I said is correct. And the state controlling tuition is a liberal policy, not a conservative. The reasons why tuition is so high is because all of the funding that goes to it. American Universities are having the same problem. The more funding a University gets, the less incentive the Universities have of lowering their prices. This is because they are going to get students anyways due to the government, so it raises the price for other students.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309
And I am in no way ignoring the socialist movement. I am very aware of the movement, and I do not support it because it has a history of failure. The privatization of industry almost always leads to a better product and better pricing. This is because the government cannot manage shit. And of course the other side is going to riot.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309 The other side does not agree with the policies of the other, so they are going to act like a bunch of baboons and scream until they get what they want. Throwing money at schools is just as dumb as Bush's "No Child Left Behind."
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507
And speaking of distorting history, why don't you tell the story of the meeting and influence of people like Adam Smith and Benjamin Franklin, and the liking Franklin had for him. Or about the founding father's influence from people like John Locke and other private property advocates. Of course you won't, because that doesn't fit your agenda.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309 And you are misquoting Thomas Paine in a major way in "The Agrarian Justice." He was not talking about socialism, which was an idea which had not gained much recognition from the writings of Plato all the way up to Marx's writings. He was a known advocate for private property rights, but simply saying that since it was man's ownership of the Earth which distinguished him, that it was up to the private property owners to pay money to the non-holders. This is NOT socialism.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
@CoolDude8675309 He was merely speaking of compassion to the poor, not socialist policy. If anything, the American Conservative gives a lot more to charity than the standard Liberal does. Now tell me where the compassion lies. For the record, I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, because I think both parties have disenfranchised the people and their human rights.
CoolDude8675309 1 year ago
hmm i love to see you living at soviet union..
dfrss 1 year ago
Webster: Definition 3
Ninja Pirate; you'll find this particularly interesting. Perhaps a return to the study of political science is in order. Just a suggestion.
Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
3 : a stage of society in MARXIST theory TRANSITIONAL between capitalism and COMMUNISM and distinguished by UNEQUAL distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
(Emphasis, Mine. Oh, but this must be the CAPITALIST Randian Fantasy definition.)
;-)
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: I am fully aware of all the possible uses of the word socialism. You'll notice that they are not the same. The term socialism predates Marx, You can't pick and choose, and decide which definition applies to me.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Which definition would you prefer? Government ownership and administration of production means has been a failure. A system of society or group living in which there is not private property or the means of production are owned and controlled by the state has been a failure, and Capitalism, cum Socialism, cum Marxism has been a failure.
I leave the choice to you. I believe the choices are failure, failure and failure.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: As I said before, I am a Democratic Socialist, and that has been a great success. Socialist ideals have changed the world in monumental ways forever, and no matter how many times you want to chant "failure" it will continue to help make the world a better place. Free market economy and deregulation failed in the great depression, and thanks to Regan it's failing again. Capitalism builds a house of cards that in the end comes crashing down.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 A more accurate study of history will show that the great depression was actually caused by regulation. Actions by the US Federal Reserve that contracted the money supply, and Britain's decision to return to the Gold Standard at pre-World War I parities were huge factors. Also, the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act and retaliatory tariffs in other countries exacerbated the collapse. Hmm.... Regulation.
Next, a lesson in the 'affordable housing' house of cards, pun intended.
dbentzen 1 year ago
LBJ: The Housing Acts of 1965 and 1968, direct subsidy to developers.
Nixon: Authorized pumping federal funds into housing production, 1972-1974
Carter: Legislated tenant cooperatives failed, forcing HUD foreclosures.
Reagan: Congress established the Low Income Housing Tax Credits, 1987
Clinton: National Homeownership Strategy, in 1994 Clinton and HUD's Henry Cizneros came up with a number of "creative measures to promote home ownership."
dbentzen 1 year ago
So, blame Reagan if you like, I blame Congress, they legislate. Clinton's initiative and NINJA loans are the cause of the housing collapse. You cannot sell homes to someone with No Income, No Job and No Assets (NINJA) It's doomed to failure. So much for government regulation. I see failure.
Outside of Scandinavia, whose countries are pretty much run by the Lutheran Church, which I suppose is socialism (at least it's sorta benevolent) can you give me examples of success with Socialism?
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: I have a lot to debate with you, unfortunately I am really busy right now, and have no time to formulate a detailed response. I will get back to you, but it will be later, so hold on, don't worry, I will show you where you are completely wrong soon.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Okie Dokie...
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Examples, man examples. I'll teach you how to debate yet, Grasshopper.
I've given you pages of examples of socialism's failure. Can you give me examples of success? I don't really know of any. Help me out.
Won't do you much good though, I'll cite why you're incorrect.
Nice video though.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Well, I did complement you on your videography, it is a nice video. Ready to take it down yet? :-0
dbentzen 1 year ago
Webster: Definition 2
Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.
dbentzen 1 year ago
Webster:
Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
dbentzen 1 year ago
I like to believe I think for myself. I also read a great deal and believe history is full of twists and turns. You haven't mentioned the demise of Thomas Paine and why he ended up penniless. I believe we can select among the good points discarding those that don't work from among all of the works of Paine and others who founded this country. I also believe you might have to reach back even further to Rome, Greece and other sources of government by the people. Historically, socialism fails.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: I didn't mention it because it has nothing to do with his political views. His attacks on religion, such as "Age of Reason" were not received well in a time where religion was still a very powerful force in society. Historically socialism has succeeded greatly, no more child labor, no more deadly working conditions, equality in Europe etc. I think you need to keep reading.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
Comment removed
dbentzen 1 year ago
Comment removed
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Perhaps I should say socialism as an economic system has failed often. I agree with your points on child labor and working conditions, but economically on much greater than a local level redistribution of wealth removes incentive.
I worked on a kibbutz in 1973. The more socialized it became, the more the society degraded. Some work, others don't. As time goes on, even such things as garbage collection broke down.
Other examples: E. Germany, USSR, more recently Greece...
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: Whether left or right, if one removes democracy from the equation, the sum is tyranny. That is why E. Germany and the USSR did not work. Greece is a democratic country, but it was only recently that the Socialist party came in to power and they even started austerity program causing riots... I don't believe in Communism. I do believe in democratic socialism. When the people who created the wealth share more in it, we will have a more prosperous society.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 This is not to say that we should throw out all socialistic ideas. Being a libertarian leaves me somewhat socially liberal but fiscally conservative. I also believe that the road FDR was following became very unpopular with a majority of the electorate, especially toward the end of his term(s).
Also I believe in taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves. So I don't disagree with everything socialist. Just it's economic failures.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Socialism becomes especially distasteful when it is combined with fascism. Examples of this are Musollini, Hitler and Franco. Mix Obama with Bush and you have a recipe for disaster.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: The only thing Socialism has in common with fascism is the concept of controlled economy, and there the similarities end. Mussolini, Hitler and Franco were not socialists in any sense of the word. They were corporatist, meaning fascist. Fascism is the exact opposite of socialism, and yes it is right wing.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 So, here's my problem. Your claim that socialism has nothing in common with fascism is untrue. Socialism is corporatist. The fed bank, the TARP takeovers, and GM are proof that we are becoming socialist. I don't really understand the allure such a diabolical form of government has on the hearts and minds of so many people these days. It sounds really good on paper, but truly doesn't work because it is so rife with fascism.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: Socialism is not at all fascist. There is a huge divide between socialism and fascism. If you knew the first thing about political science you would know this. Fascism is not in the least socialistic.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 You're funny. The divide between socialism and fascism quickly closes as more and more discrete rules are applied to socialism. You're welcome to live under the rules of someone who knows what's best for you. I prefer freedom. Here's how benign socialism becomes fascism: I'll leave it to you to patch this together: you tube com watch?v=OEDk9o3fxuI
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 You said: "When the people who created the wealth share more in it, we will have a more prosperous society." Patently untrue, we will have a LESS prosperous society, those who create wealth will lose the incentive to create wealth, wealth will disappear.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen:What you said is only true if you live in an Ayn Randian fantasy. I live in the real world. When you want to discuss reality, not the plot of a stupid Ayn Rand book, try again.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Funny again. Yes, I'm a bit of a Libertarian, but certainly not an anarchist. Also when you start calling names, you begin to lose the debate. If you're going to call someone or something stupid, you ought to refer to facts to back up your opinion. Debate 101.
This IS fun though. Also, I may have a slightly separate reality from yours, but I base my findings and opinions on historical fact, not fantasy. Your arguments give away your naivete and your youthful enthusiasm
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: Where did I call you a name? Where did I say you were an Anarchist? You know you are losing an argument when you have to construct a strawman fallacy to try to claim "victory". Your line was straight out of an Ayn Rand characters mouth, which is why I made the connection. Economic equality does not mean less for everyone, what you said was completely false, and you have nothing to back it up with, yet you just want to be condescending. Do you have anything of substance to argue?
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Ah, the straw man defense. You didn't call me a name directly, just referred to a 'stupid' book. And I didn't say YOU called me an anarchist, I just said I'm Libertarian, which indicates I agree with some of what Ayn Rand wrote. Just clarification of my point about both Ayn Rand's tales not a straw man. I state I am a Libertarian EXCEPT for the absence of an anarchist bent. You were the one to bring up Ayn Rand. There's the straw man.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: You said I had called names. I did not. Libertarianism and Anarchism are two separate things, and we're not discussing Anarchism. I did not make a strawman as what you said is Ayn Randian therefore not an assumption on my part.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Oh, but I thought you were a student of political science. My mistake. The concept of pure Libertarianism relies on the removal of all government and rules; hence in it's pure form is identical to anarchy. I am only a lower case libertarian and don't go as far as the total anarchy some of my purist friends advocate.
How did Ayn Rand enter this debate? You brought her up. When you did, I clarified. But I Digress. Read my comment about Socialist Republics and carry on.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: And if you were, you would know that Libertarianism is right wing, while Anarchism is usually a left wing ideology. Libertarianism is capitalist, whereas Anarchism is usually socialist or non statist communist in it's ideology. Pure libertarianism would not be Anarchism at all.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
Comment removed
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 I have only history to enforce my debate. As you watch the socialist republics collapse (Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, there will be more) you'll begin to see what I'm talking about. As capitalism becomes constricted, and socialistic rules are applied, capitalism begins to break down.
My goal? To work toward removal of rules that don't really work for me. Your goal may be to work toward creating rules for me. Good luck with that.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: The problem with those countries was capitalism, not the socialism. If you wanted to argue that why are you not putting more capitalistic nations on the list of those that have failed? For you a somewhat leftist government falling means all leftist governments are inherently flawed, yet rightist governments and economies failing means that capitalism is working. I find your position to be disingenuous. Continued..
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
Why are you not mentioning France and their stellar performance in this whole world wide economic downturn? I think you don't mention it because it does not support your argument.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 Don't get me wrong, youthful enthusiasm is a great attribute. However, age and wisdom beat youth and enthusiasm every time. Oh, and when I was your age I was an avowed communist. Che Guevara was my hero. Then I spent time in Romania under Ceausescu, Yogoslavia under Tito and the Deutsche Democratik Republic, which you might know as Communist East Germany.
They were just simple Socialist Republics where dictators took their despotism a little far.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@dbentzen: Your political history and anectdotes have little meaning for me. There will be others your age who have a history opposite yours and it proves nothing. I am not talking about communism, nor am I advocating it or any kind of totalitarian government. I am a advocate of democratic socialism, not Che style revolution. As I have said many times, if the democratic element is removed the government is a tyranny.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 I'm not sure how someone could have an opposite history from mine, I was there. I don't think you're following my argument, when I said there will be more, France will follow, so will Germany. The socialists in these countries must blame someone. They, like you, believe it is capitalism that is causing their failure.
If either France or Germany return to their own currency, their respective republics will fail also. It's not capitalism, but socialism causing failure.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 And I argue that adding Socialism to the equation indeed REMOVES the democratic element. Socialists create rules governing things they know nothing about, like economics, engineering, science, technology, and weather. Socialism seeks to control that which cannot be controlled. By doing so It fails. Or the rule makers create their own fairy tales about how things work as in Global Warming, er, um, Climate Change, er, um, Weather.
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 I just can't wait for your reply. I love to write! I use to type at nearly 100 WPM, But I've gotten old and lazy with the advent of these new fangled computer thingies. Now I type backwards as fast as I do forward. But still at 80 WPM...
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 And yes, it's obvious my political history and amusing historical anecdotes have no meaning for you. You probably do a lot of dreaming. I did when I was your age too. I still do. I'm here simply to encourage you to think. I KNOW I'm not going to convince you of anything. I couldn't be convinced either. At first...
dbentzen 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 By the way, I'm not a religious person, but religion is still an EXTREMELY powerful force in society.
dbentzen 1 year ago
You all do realize our president FDR during the WW2 era was a democratic SOCIALIST who won a war, improved our economy, and was going to introduce a 2nd bill of rights which gave everyone freedom regardless of color or creed also he was going to give everyone health care. He died before he could do it during his term and yet everyone worships this time in America's history but neglects this idea of him being a socialist. All these scare tactics are funny as fuck because they are lies.
NewRevolutionLeader 1 year ago
@NewRevolutionLeader : I do realize all of that, the question is, does America realize it? Many don't. Many have been lied to by Faux News and Glenn Beck. That's why I am getting the word out.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507
Yes, Fox News are some racist capitalist pigs who spend their time downing socialism and showing hitler as the leader of it. Hitler hijacked socialism because socialism was started by a German (most likely Jewish) named Karl Marx and he created this well before the Nazi party. Glenn Beck is a nut case who screams and cries like a little girl every show. He cries for that couple of million he's thrown like a bone. Socialism as a economic and foreign policy works.
NewRevolutionLeader 1 year ago 2
@NewRevolutionLeader: Right you are. Well said.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
MOAR!
reverendmbrewer 1 year ago
@reverendmbrewer : Moar is coming bro :)
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
@ninjapirate0507 MOAR NAO! :-)
reverendmbrewer 1 year ago
Great video! It makes me sick whenever I hear Glenn Beck proclaim that they follow the principles of Thomas Paine when in fact, he follows the principles of Reagan and Bush and Goldwater.
DixonRants 1 year ago
@DixonRants: Right you are. Thanks!
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
I like your videos.
AccOfSpdes 1 year ago
@AccOfSpdes : Thank you.
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
Interesting video. Nice to see other sides of the American founders then what the tea beggers want to show.
All love from me Jasmine
Eopyk 1 year ago
@Eopyk : Thanks Jasmine. :) Bringin' knowledge to the masses!
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago
Thanks, ninjapirate, another good one. Keep em' coming. Hope all is well with you...
2Majesties 1 year ago
@2Majesties : Thanks! Will do :)
ninjapirate0507 1 year ago