View Poll Results: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

Voters
52. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    20 38.46%
  • No

    30 57.69%
  • No opinion

    2 3.85%
Page 25 of 28 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 277

Thread: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

  1. #241
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    What about the racist impulse in America that says black people can't cut it on their own so the government has to implement a preferential hiring policy called "Affirmative Action"? That's left-wing racism, there.

    How about the racist impulses that make white American english speaking males the only class of people in the nation which can be discriminated against. Again, this establishment of racial preferences is driven by leftists.
    That's probably going off-topic, but let's do that:

    There are very good reasons to support or oppose AA which have nothing to do with racism. Probably you can bring up certain good arguments against which are not racist.

    I can try to give a good argument in favor: Due to existing racism among the white population, blacks statistically are facing a disadvantage which lowers their prospects and opportunities. For example, white employers will less likely hire black employees, white teachers will give blacks worse grades, statistically. Affirmative Action is just a means to pose a counter-weight against these disadvantages for blacks.

    You may believe this means is flawed, you may also believe this brings more bad than good. But unless we make empirical studies on that field, we won't know how well it works or how unefficient it is. We cannot know on the spot who is right. So you are free to disagree, but please pay people who believe AA is a good thing to do the deserved respect, instead of calling them "racists".
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  2. #242
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by German guy View Post
    I said that before, but in Germany, it were the at that time even Marxist Social Democrats who were the strongest supporter of freedom, liberty and constitutional order: They established the free Weimar Republic in 1919, crushed the communist revolutionaries, battled the monarchist authoritarians and were the only party to vote against Hitler's Enabling Act in 1933. And after 1945, the Social Democrats defended constitutional democracy in the West against the Soviets and commies in East Germany.
    No socialist or communist is a supporter of liberty, unless they're voluntarily moving to a commune with other volunteers and not using or demanding that the power of government be employed to coerce others to support their schemes. The socialists of the Weimar Republic didn't fall into that category.

    You really need to read a little history and get your facts straight. Then you wouldn't spout such absurd generalizations.
    You need to understand that socialism on any national level involves the threat or use of brutal men with guns to enforce compliance with the program.

    The problem are not people on the left in general. The problem are people who hate freedom and constitutional order. And those exist both on left and right.
    One can't be on the left is one supports true freedom. It's that simply. Using government to compel compliance is anti-freedom.

    Taxes are necessary in any state.
    Taxes TO SUPPORT THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS of government are necessary.

    And government isn't supposed to be perfoming functions outside of that core. Ergo, taxes to support socialism are not "necessary", as socialism isn't necessary.

    To determine how large they should be, and who has to pay how much, is the job of a free, constitutional system.
    Under the Constitution THE MAYOR lives under, the government isn't allowed to be socialist, for the most part. It does have one or two flaws, of course.

    And, under the Fourteenth Amendment it's pretty clear that either everyone pays an equal share to support the lawful (ie, Constitutional) functions of government, or everyone pays an equal percentage.

    You can vote for those politicians and parties which reflect your ideas about taxes. But when others disagree, you have no right to condemn them, as long as they too respect the constitutional order, but you have to present good counter-arguments.
    Actually, The Mayor does have that right. Ah, the advantages of not living in Europe:

    Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

  3. #243
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by German guy View Post
    That's probably going off-topic, but let's do that:

    There are very good reasons to support or oppose AA which have nothing to do with racism. Probably you can bring up certain good arguments against which are not racist.

    I can try to give a good argument in favor: Due to existing racism among the white population, blacks statistically are facing a disadvantage which lowers their prospects and opportunities. For example, white employers will less likely hire black employees, white teachers will give blacks worse grades, statistically. Affirmative Action is just a means to pose a counter-weight against these disadvantages for blacks.

    You may believe this means is flawed, you may also believe this brings more bad than good. But unless we make empirical studies on that field, we won't know how well it works or how unefficient it is. We cannot know on the spot who is right. So you are free to disagree, but please pay people who believe AA is a good thing to do the deserved respect, instead of calling them "racists".
    No. Two arguments not based on race exist against Affirmative Action.

    1) The Constittuion does not grant the federal government the authority to place such impositions on private employers, though certainly it could be made part of any contract obligation for any vendors to the government itself.

    2) The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause strictly prohibits any discriminatory hiring schemes whatsoever.

    Then there's the fact that it isn't the government's job to control the emotions of the people, including the emotions of racial bigotry. Again, the Constitution in no place allows any such power to the governent, and you should read the Ninth Amendment.

    What you've just argued, in more words, is that you believe that black people couldn't cut it on their own, which was always the dominating argument from the Party of Jefferson Davis.

  4. #244
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    No socialist or communist is a supporter of liberty, unless they're voluntarily moving to a commune with other volunteers and not using or demanding that the power of government be employed to coerce others to support their schemes. The socialists of the Weimar Republic didn't fall into that category.
    What's your point now? That socialists in the Weimar Republic were not really socialists, as you define them?

    Fact is, the Social Democrats were still Marxists at that time. But they were anti-revolutionary, anti-dictatorship and pro-constitutional, pro-freedom. They were much more "left" than Democrats and Obama, yet they bitterly defended freedom against commies and Nazis.

    See why your logic doesn't compute? Your broad-brush label of "socialism" is flawed, because it blurs important distinctions.

    You need to understand that socialism on any national level involves the threat or use of brutal men with guns to enforce compliance with the program.
    I agree this is the case when it comes to authoritarian, revolutionary brands of "socialism", aka "communism". But I disagree that liberals, social democrats or even most democratic, non-revolutionary socialists have anything to do with that. Just like Republicans have nothing to do with Nazis, despite certain similarities on some fields.

    One can't be on the left is one supports true freedom. It's that simply. Using government to compel compliance is anti-freedom.
    Of course you can. Read a little history and political theory.

    Taxes TO SUPPORT THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS of government are necessary.

    And government isn't supposed to be perfoming functions outside of that core. Ergo, taxes to support socialism are not "necessary", as socialism isn't necessary.
    Yes, but there has to be a debate what is ESSENTIAL, because there hardly is a consensus. That's why you respectfully debate this within the constitutional frame with your political competitors.

    Under the Constitution THE MAYOR lives under, the government isn't allowed to be socialist, for the most part. It does have one or two flaws, of course.
    "Socialism" would mean a nationalization of all the economy, maybe abolishing private property entirely -- and nobody in America is advocating that, as far as I can see.
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  5. #245
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    No. Two arguments not based on race exist against Affirmative Action.

    1) The Constittuion does not grant the federal government the authority to place such impositions on private employers, though certainly it could be made part of any contract obligation for any vendors to the government itself.
    If this was true, why has the Supreme Court not ruled it unconstitutional?

    2) The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection clause strictly prohibits any discriminatory hiring schemes whatsoever.
    Exactly. That's why there *must* be AA: In order to balance the existing racism against blacks.

    Then there's the fact that it isn't the government's job to control the emotions of the people, including the emotions of racial bigotry. Again, the Constitution in no place allows any such power to the governent, and you should read the Ninth Amendment.
    That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But you have no right to smear those who disagree -- with good arguments -- as "racists" or authoritarians.

    What you've just argued, in more words, is that you believe that black people couldn't cut it on their own, which was always the dominating argument from the Party of Jefferson Davis.
    The difference is that this party assumed blacks can't do that, because they're racially inferior. I argue they can't, because they are disadvantaged by white racism against blacks. The former is racism, the latter is the opposite.
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  6. #246
    Sage
    kaya'08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    British Turk
    Last Seen
    05-12-14 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,363

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    The Nazi ideology revolves around a racially prejudice thought system and it's very intent is to destroy and purify society based on how an individual was born. Communism is an ideology that is not inherintly evil or destructive and it's belief system does not require violence to achieve its stated goal. That is the silver divide between the two.

    I mean sure, all communist countries that have existed thus far have done little to improve the image of communism or create a communism based on Democratic values, and the best candidate to facilitate this change in image is currently one of the worst violators of human rights (China).

    But their should be a clear distinction between a man who believes a society should have a particular ethnic makeup and a man who believes money should flow differently in a market and the two should not be treated the same.

    We have to be careful when it comes to condemning non-violent ideologies because we set an intolerant precident which cannot work in a modern society.
    Last edited by kaya'08; 05-20-11 at 08:39 PM.
    "If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in quite a different world" - Christopher Hitchens
    > Good to be back, but I'm only visiting for a few weeks. <

  7. #247
    Sage
    kaya'08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    British Turk
    Last Seen
    05-12-14 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,363

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Although i stress we should only ever actively promote the most just system and that in my mind will always be free market Democracy.
    "If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in quite a different world" - Christopher Hitchens
    > Good to be back, but I'm only visiting for a few weeks. <

  8. #248
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    The Nazi ideology revolves around a racially prejudice thought system and it's very intent is to destroy and purify society based on how an individual was born. Communism is an ideology that is not inherintly evil or destructive and it's belief system does not require violence to achieve its stated goal. That is the silver divide between the two.

    I mean sure, all communist countries that have existed thus far have done little to improve the image of communism or create a communism based on Democratic values, and the best candidate to facilitate this change in image is currently one of the worst violators of human rights (China).

    But their should be a clear distinction between a man who believes a society should have a certain genetic pattern and a man who believes money should flow differently in a market and the two should not be treated the same.

    We have to be careful when it comes to condemning non-violent ideologies because we set an intolerant precident which cannot work in a modern society.
    I fully agree, just that I tend to believe communist ideology (the revolutionary brand) will inevitably lead to oppression and mass murder, no matter how good the intentions (when you are ready to establish a dictatorship to get through your ideas, that's what happens). Supporting dictatorship as a means is the worst problem here, not the goal of different distribution of wealth.

    But apart from that, I agree: There should be a clear distinction between a man who believes a society should have a certain genetic pattern and a man who believes money should flow differently in a market and the two should not be treated the same.

    I give the left at least that: They are asking the right questions, although I disagree with their answers. A fair society without poverty is not a bad goal. But as it often happens, the way to hell is paved with good intentions. There is some truth in the saying "who isn't a communist with 20 has no heart, but who still is a communist with 30 has no brain".

    The far-right doesn't even have that. They're not even asking the right question. A racially, religiously or nationally "pure" society? Making a difference between the value of different human beings? Even the questions they begin with are for the trash bin.
    Last edited by German guy; 05-20-11 at 08:45 PM.
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  9. #249
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by kaya'08 View Post
    That depends on how the leaders decide to go about initiating the communism. You can do it fidel style and bury anybody who questions the system or you can transition the country over to communism in a Democratic manner. For example i know of an Indian state that has historically voted communism in democratic elections even though non-communist parties could be elected.

    Leaders make the decision to initiate communism with a mandate or by force, but that's their choice and not a prerequisite to their ideology. It's utterly ridiculous to suggest it is comparable with the Nazi's.
    Yes, I'm just using a slightly different terminology.

    I'm no expert on the history of Marxism or socialism, but as far as I know, the question about the means to be used to establish communism caused the "great schizm" among socialists in the late 1910s, early 1920s: The violent people splitted off from the socialist parties and called themselves "communists", because they supported violent revolution (also against liberal democracies) and "dictatorship of the proletariat", following the communist revolution in Russia. The remaining social democrats and democratic socialists were strictly reformist, anti-revolutionary and supported liberal, constitutional democracies, rejecting the Soviet way.

    That's why I use the labels "socialist" or "social democrats" for the reformist "good guys" and "communists" for the authoritarian "bad guys". Usually, people then understand what I mean, when I call the StalinMaoPot-bad guys "commies", to distinguish them from the harmless, peaceful "socialists". Just this new American trend to shift the meaning and definitions in order to gain partisan advantage stand in the way of agreement with some in this thread, such as Alfons.

    This distinction of socialists and communists doesn't always match the names of parties, though. IIRC, the French "communists" are no longer revolutionary, but accept the constitution and liberal political system, yet they keep calling themselves "communists" for traditional reasons. So they rather are "democratic socialists". Probably that's the case with that Indian party too. And the communists started calling themselves "socialist" in most East Bloc countries, although they actually were "communists".
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  10. #250
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Fair is fair.. when you lot condemn 5000 years of conservative and religious conservative mass murder then I expect the "left" to do the same about their own people.
    Start explaining the mass murder boy!
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 25 of 28 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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