The greatest proponent of Socialism

[Pliny]

The title of the thread might initiate the thought of Marx and Engels, or Rousseau, or even Plato if you have done any studying on the subject.

The greatest socialist that ever lived was an American and he lived in the twentieth century.

Who was this great socialist? He stated that, "competition was the greatest sin". Yes - it was JD Rockefeller.

Most people think of him as a capitalist. For himself he was, socialism for the masses was what he needed to protect his holdings and create the greatest monopoly in the world.

[eyeball]

Most people think of him as a capitalist. For himself he was, socialism for the masses was what he needed to protect his holdings and create the greatest monopoly in the world.

Sounds like what he really needed and likely got, was a government to facilitate his monopolization. What the masses need is a better grip on their government than Rockefeller and his ilk have.

This business of the masses getting a better grip on their government has little if anything to do with capitalism or socialism aside from society having to compete with capital to influence the government.

"competition was the greatest sin"

Like most anything else competition is just a thing, its what we do with it that counts. I don't think choosing to sin with it has much to do competition.

[lictor616]

The title of the thread might initiate the thought of Marx and Engels, or Rousseau, or even Plato if you have done any studying on the subject.

The greatest socialist that ever lived was an American and he lived in the twentieth century.

Who was this great socialist? He stated that, "competition was the greatest sin". Yes - it was JD Rockefeller.

Most people think of him as a capitalist. For himself he was, socialism for the masses was what he needed to protect his holdings and create the greatest monopoly in the world.

greatest socialist? our own Brock Chisholm, a creature who once stated openly that the international children of the future would be coffee colored mongrels, raised in pens communally and controlled by psycho active drugs to keep from having normal human instinct (which of course lead to war racism and other nasty stuff)...

with honorable mention to Dr. C.M. Pierce of Harvard and his address to the Childhood Education International Association in 1973, when he famously stated that:

"Every child in American entering school at the age of 5 is insane, because he comes to school with certain allegiances toward our founding fathers, towards his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity...It's up to you teachers to make all of these sick children well, by creating the international children of the future."

[Oleg Bach]

Every child is insane that has an allegance to family - to father and to mother - to brother and sister - to the tribe -- So the early childhood educators who do the bidding of the big clan and tribe - our established elite - make sure that we are powerless and not unitied - it's the capitalist demi-gods that push socialism on us - because they need a weak minded and devided populace to do the work for them - while we are equally poor and a few live like gods on earth..

[Pliny]

greatest socialist? our own Brock Chisholm, a creature who once stated openly that the international children of the future would be coffee colored mongrels, raised in pens communally and controlled by psycho active drugs to keep from having normal human instinct (which of course lead to war racism and other nasty stuff)...

with honorable mention to Dr. C.M. Pierce of Harvard and his address to the Childhood Education International Association in 1973, when he famously stated that:

"Every child in American entering school at the age of 5 is insane, because he comes to school with certain allegiances toward our founding fathers, towards his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity...It's up to you teachers to make all of these sick children well, by creating the international children of the future."

Interesting that you should bring up Brock Chisholm, I am impressed that you even know his name.

[Pliny]

Every child is insane that has an allegance to family - to father and to mother - to brother and sister - to the tribe -- So the early childhood educators who do the bidding of the big clan and tribe - our established elite - make sure that we are powerless and not unitied - it's the capitalist demi-gods that push socialism on us - because they need a weak minded and devided populace to do the work for them - while we are equally poor and a few live like gods on earth..

I would have to agree with you.

[lictor616]

Interesting that you should bring up Brock Chisholm, I am impressed that you even know his name.

I had to trudge through some of his written WHO dispatches, (handling them with gloves), it was incredible to sample his mind... If there ever was a prime example of a mattoid, Chisholm was it. what a vicious degenerate that man was...

[Pliny]

I had to trudge through some of his written WHO dispatches, (handling them with gloves), it was incredible to sample his mind... If there ever was a prime example of a mattoid, Chisholm was it. what a vicious degenerate that man was...

I agree. His name ranks high on the list of those who "know best" and can therefore run our lives for us - IF he were benevolent enough to grant us one.

Socialism comes out of the capitalist designing the optimal method of retaining their wealth and status. Marx and Engels as you know ran a factory in England which allowed them to study capitalism and the working class. Why they neglected to include themselves as bourgoisie overseers of their studies is beyond me.

The biggest influence on governments were capitalists and those interested in retaining their wealth which was not only threatened by the masses but by government as well through taxation. The poor had nothing that needed protection except their very lives and the wealthy were concerned about losing their possessions. They paid Kings ahndsomely for protection ofr local and foreign interests. Royalty and it's wealth were never above threat of loss. And perhaps royalty in league with the wealthy landowners strove to protect themselves from any threat of loss. It was too easy to lose one's head in those days. Governments, loyal to royalty, were the most effective buffer between the masses and the throne. Governments could then be overthrown and the King or the Queen could step in as the Savior and heroes of the masses sheltering them from the cruelty and oppression of government if that should be the perception of the masses. God save the King!, and all that!

Control of the economy is an essential in protecting wealth. You must control the flow of money and ensure it is not concentrated in the wrong hands. A method for the redistribution of wealth other than "deflation" (The most natural, effective and just form of wealth redistribution) had to be devised. Taxation was the earliest form and then fiat currencies made it practically a fait accomplis today. But as we know fiat currencies never work for long.

I don't have any objection to someone wishing to protect his wealth and as a matter of fact I think our governance up until recently has been pretty good. Lately though concern for non-renewable resource depletion and overpopulation have given those that hold wealth pause for concern about their holdings. with China and Russia not having any historical ties with European and North American evolution they are not seen as global players but also since they are becoming powerful are a bit of a concern. Africa and India too are emerging as impotant players although there is not much concern in the global state of affairs regarding India as it is a member fo the British Commonwealth as is South Africa. But South Africa is interested in being a communist nation and I expect it will sever it's ties with the Commonwealth. Not much of a big deal to those who view it as largely a ceremonial and historic tie void of any cultural base. However, on a global basis it is a real shift in wealth. I would not be surprised that South Africa finds a growing favour of capitalism and a taste for more right wing or at least more central politics.

Anyway, with resources and population and the rising powers of other nations their is a definite concern about the wealth and status of the global hierarchy.

[Zachary Young]

Adam Smith.

[Pliny]

Adam Smith.

How so?

[Shwa]

"The greatest proponent of Socialism" J.D. Rockefeller? Nah. Plus his version of "socialism" wasn't sustainable.

The greatest proponent of socialism was the guy who invented the armed forces of the modern welfare state. As much as the eagle-eyed US conservatives decry socialism, they have what they have because of the socialist nature of their army. Imagine that. Sending a socialist - heck, communist-like society of people (the US Armed Forces) to fight in the name of capitalism and freedom and stuff. You want free medical, clothing, work tools, food for your family, living quarters, and all those other nice promises of socialism? All state paid. Look no further than your local recruitment office. And try and run away once you have signed up and see what happens.

But lets hear about Adam Smith...

[Pliny]

"The greatest proponent of Socialism" J.D. Rockefeller? Nah. Plus his version of "socialism" wasn't sustainable.

The greatest proponent of socialism was the guy who invented the armed forces of the modern welfare state. As much as the eagle-eyed US conservatives decry socialism, they have what they have because of the socialist nature of their army. Imagine that. Sending a socialist - heck, communist-like society of people (the US Armed Forces) to fight in the name of capitalism and freedom and stuff. You want free medical, clothing, work tools, food for your family, living quarters, and all those other nice promises of socialism? All state paid. Look no further than your local recruitment office. And try and run away once you have signed up and see what happens.

But lets hear about Adam Smith...

Well we know that the welfare /warfare state must be paid for somehow. Is it taxes?

Shwa, who invented the armed forces of the welfare/warfare state?

[charter.rights]

Well we know that the welfare /warfare state must be paid for somehow. Is it taxes?

Shwa, who invented the armed forces of the welfare/warfare state?

The spoils of colonialism pays for the armed forces who go in liberate the masses and make them consumers of American goods. Taxes don't even pay for the services we receive.

[Shwa]

"Shwa, who invented the armed forces of the welfare/warfare state?"

I dunno, but he was the greatest proponent of Socialism in my books. I mean, as a model, the US Armed Forces have Socialism down to a tee don't they? Everyone works, everyone gets educated or entertained, they have their own police, their own economic system, their own hospitals, their own indoctrination methods. Quite sophisticated actually, as Socialism goes...

[Pliny]

"Shwa, who invented the armed forces of the welfare/warfare state?"

I dunno, but he was the greatest proponent of Socialism in my books. I mean, as a model, the US Armed Forces have Socialism down to a tee don't they? Everyone works, everyone gets educated or entertained, they have their own police, their own economic system, their own hospitals, their own indoctrination methods. Quite sophisticated actually, as Socialism goes...

I think I understand what you are saying.

Basically, that the military is a socialist organization. Actually, all organizations are structured form the top down just as is the military organization. The military are concerned with the use of force and discipline and the chain of command is a matter of life and death in their purpose. It is the military life. But the military does as well as the economy that supports them does because they are paid for out of the economy they are charged with protecting.

A corporation or business doesn't come near needing the discipline and authoritative dictatorial measures necessary in the military. There are not generally concerned with matters of life and death and if the corporation fails the individuals move on to something else. The members of a corporation are generally aligned and hired because they are on line with the purpose of the organization. It is a co-operative effort toward success. Certainly, there is a structure resembling the military with a chain of command.

Socialism in government, government being an organization with a heirarchical structure not dissimilar to other organizations, is when it attempts to be the organization running other organizations in society. It is charged with ensuring the safety of the citizens from criminality and stopping the use of force initiated by someone or a group against another individual or group. It is the sole agency in a society that can legally use or delegate the use of force.

[Pliny]

The spoils of colonialism pays for the armed forces who go in liberate the masses and make them consumers of American goods. Taxes don't even pay for the services we receive.

Who paid for the armed forces in the USSR or who pays in North Korea?

Taxes don't pay for what services we receive?