PDA

View Full Version : Help counter these arguments with a socialist...




JXL78
11-05-2009, 01:31 PM
Just wanted you guys to read some of this... **bangs head on desk**...lol


many people in the U.S have swallowed this massive propaganda pill that suggests that somehow socialist structure leads to the removal of freedom. They distort what socialism actually is as a result of a conservative fear. Canada has many social programs and I have total choice. if i feel sick i can go to any clinic i want, and it's automatically covered. it takes like 5 seconds to sign in.

I might have to wait about 30 minutes
I don't have to go to some appointed hospital
I get help from what ever doctor is working
that doctor gets to work where ever the fuck he wants

What you're calling socialism sounds more like some sort of Stalinism.

"...$20 dollar bill in your pocket you should give $5 to each of them...."

This is the type of stuff that i'm talking about. WHY -- on EARTH, would you think that me supporting the BLIND distribution of wealth, would be in any way hypocritical of my socialist values? you clearly have no understanding of socialist democratic systems. it has nothing to do with the blind redistribution of wealth.

It has everything to do with realizing that YOUR FREEDOM is only valuable inside a social area. human beings are pack animals, and it's important for everyone who isn't a psychopath to see his neighbor thrive. that's called "love" -- and as you know, love is predicated on a healthy love of self, not self sacrifice. freedom is central to any socialist system working properly -- but we've got a problem here -- should we support one's freedom to be sociopathic and care only for himself?

NO. we fucking shouldn't:

the only solution to suffering is genuine human compassion, and that means having the desire to GIVE OF YOURSELF. this is an emotionally and spiritual evolved issue and we need some sort of structure to encourage people to mature to the point where the can operate in this way. This is the "higher standard" that i'm talking about.

YES. it's more mature to care if my neighbor thrives, and to be less concerned about taking for myself, and if we're going to move forward as a culture, we've got to stand up and fucking announce that.

now- this concept of the people in the military being somehow automatically heroes because they're serving their country, and somehow I'm NOT, is bullshit.. and it's EXACTLY the type of problem that I'm speaking to. you and your family are a part of your culture and as such, you contribute to america. your serving your country right now, but entering into a debate that will create new ideas. hopefully we'll both be lifted up. if that isn't a service to the country, i dont know what is.

now note -- even the most staunch conservative will support socialism in SOME area. it does work in the military, quite well.

but if we do away with the concept that the mlitary are the only people who are serving the country, and we decide to create a governing body that holds the people to a standard higher than egocentrism, why the hell shouldn't I get free health care? do we really WANT a culture that only supports people being ready to die for their country? is that what we really want as a standard? doesn't that seem sort of.. well.. totally fucked up?

the concept that you, you patriot, would avoid having a CHILD because you couldn't afford it.. that's.. horrific! that's horrible!

don't you feel like you live in a culture that has failed you, when you're afraid to do the most basic of all human behaviors? this is a goddamn war against fucking evolution!

Then there is this...I guess this situation means we should embrace socialism...


Thought everyone would like to see this video where the parents of a murdered boy are billed $30K for 5 minutes in the emergency room.

YouTube - Sorry About Your Dead Son; That Will Be $29,186.50, Please (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j5junlHe7Q&feature=player_embedded)

But it's the free market, I guess next time their son is murdered they can go to a different hospital. Kind of like how if you don't like Sony TVs, next time you can buy a Panasonic

AuH20
11-05-2009, 01:43 PM
Why would any self-professed free thinker submit himself to the whims of the body collective? These socialists are always railing about their "individuality" and "creative expression", yet never contrast these concepts against their state-based solutions for humanity. Man has proven to be such an incorrigible and fallible creature throughout the ages that the dispersal and dilution of power is essential. Productive humanitarian endeavors can be accomplished through the volition of the individual, as opposed to enforcement via the barrel of a gun.

JXL78
11-05-2009, 01:45 PM
Why would any self-professed free thinker submit himself to the whims of the body collective? These socialists are always railing about their "individuality" and "creative expression" yet never contrast these concepts against their state-based solutions for humanity. Man has proven to be such an incorrigible and fallible creature throughout the ages that the dispersal and dilution of power is essential. Productive humanitarian endeavors can be accomplished through the volition of the individual, as opposed to being enforced upon the masses via the barrel of a gun.

slam dunk I must say.

The problem is these people want solutions...they just don't understand why the system has failed them...they keep blaming capitalism.

YumYum
11-05-2009, 02:01 PM
My research has lead me to believe that the closest example that we have of a true Free Market capitalistic society on the planet was Afghanistan. They had no central government, and they had unhindered free trade. Now we have gone in there and are trying to change their system, which has suited them fine for hundreds of years. What we have to do is find a balance between government intervention verses non-intervention. The problem with our government is that it is so damn corrupt.

NYgs23
11-05-2009, 02:04 PM
He should go found his own voluntary socialist society. He just can't impose it on unwilling people at the point of a gun.


that's called "love"

There is no love at the point of a gun.

AuH20
11-05-2009, 02:04 PM
slam dunk I must say.

The problem is these people want solutions...they just don't understand why the system has failed them...they keep blaming capitalism.

The problem is in the mirror. It's easy to blame the shell of capitalism that currently monopolizes the country. But when you start peel back the layers, you see how frighteningly centralized the supposed 'free market' is.

EndDaFed
11-05-2009, 02:05 PM
I would love to but I'm too lazy. It's not my argument anyways.

This might help you.

YouTube - True News 46: Health Care Part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt0tKl0J-S4)
YouTube - True News 47: Health Care Part 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD2UUH4E2Xs)

haaaylee
11-05-2009, 02:14 PM
take an economic stand point, and address the right to keep the fruits of your labor . to start. . .

teacherone
11-05-2009, 02:42 PM
Under a socialist society individuals are meaningless, their rights can be trampled upon, their property confiscated, their lives destroyed all for the "Common Good" of the collective.

Under Socialism individuals possess nothing, because it is the State which determines the minimum standard of living good enough for the Collective and forceably removes and redistributes individual wealth so that all achieve this arbitrary minimum standard.

Under socialism no one is allowed to profit, because profit is evil; it produces inequality and is only the motive that drives "greedy capitalists." An artist who creates a masterpiece or an inventor who toils to create something new and innovative, does not profit from his effort; he cannot profit, for in the name of "Equality" his work belongs to the collective group. His profits are therefore forcibly removed and handed over to the lesser competent in the name of Equality.

Under socialism you cannot better your standard of living; you cannot rise up the social ranks when there are none. The station you were born in is the station you will die in. You will not leave behind an inheritance for your children, you will not imagine a better future for them or hope that their lives will be better than yours-- there is no better, there is no worse, there is only equality.

Freedom and socialism are antithetical and cannot exist within the same sphere. Socialism means that your life is planned and organized by the supreme elites who control the machine of the state. They decide how much you are allowed to earn, which jobs you are worthy of, under which standard of living you will suffer through your days.

Socialism, Communism, Fascism, it makes no difference. They are all forms of Totalitarianism where individuals are no longer recognized as such, only insignificant cogs in the Collective Machine. It should come as no surprise that Socialism leads to Totalitarian Dictatorships-- Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Mussolini, Hitler, Kim Jong Il.

Is this what you want?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2370934&postcount=1

JXL78
11-05-2009, 03:45 PM
My research has lead me to believe that the closest example that we have of a true Free Market capitalistic society on the planet was Afghanistan. They had no central government, and they had unhindered free trade. Now we have gone in there and are trying to change their system, which has suited them fine for hundreds of years. What we have to do is find a balance between government intervention verses non-intervention. The problem with our government is that it is so damn corrupt.

I think what you want pretty much describes a Republic and not a Democracy. The need for some government...the rule of law...and not have total anarchy that gets out of control like the taliban. We have the illusion of Democracy but it is more Oligarchy in reality.

There was a JBS video that described this well, i forget the name.

From Left to Right it works like this...

Monarchy------Oligarchy-------Democracy------Republic------Anarchy

teacherone: well done.

apropos
11-05-2009, 05:47 PM
To win this argument, simply have them elaborate on the following statement:


we need some sort of structure to encourage people to mature to the point where the can operate in this way.

What would this system be? Certainly there would need to be people to manage it. How would those leaders encourage others to "mature"? Who decides what "mature" is? When the definition of "mature" differs, what is to be done? Of course we can debate, but what if there is not uniform agreement? Should we then set up committees to exterminate those who have a faulty and immature understanding of our great experiment's noble goals? Surely the running dog bourgeois parasites have infiltrated the opposing movement, because only a sociopath would oppose our moral aims and enlightened understanding.