Where do you land? Is socialism a failed experiment or have we just not tried the right kind?

[West]

Where do you stand on socialism? Failed experiment that leads to death, high inflation and poverty or have we just not tried the right kind?

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, West said:

Where do you stand on socialism? Failed experiment that leads to death, high inflation and poverty or have we just not tried the right kind?

Socialism is the mechanism that supposedly leads to the perfectly egalitarian post scarcity Communist Utopia

it inevitably fails, as all Utopianism does

but Canadians are deluded as to the actual nature of Socialism

Canadians believe Socialism is a political ideology, when really it is religion

Socialism has become the state religion of Canada

and that is how Canada has become a Communist country for all intents & purposes

Communism isn't really about economics

Communism is simply a faith in the Hegelian myth that we are all on a path to a Utopia

you will see Canadians constantly engaged in the Hegelian Dialectic therein

this is where the Socialists are convinced, that if they just get rid of all the non believers

then their Utopia will be at hand somehow

 you can't debate with a Socialist, you can't negotiate with a Socialist

they are zealots : if you don't accept their faith, they will simply castigate you as an infidel

to a Socialist, if you're not a Socialist, then you're just evil, a bad person

the vast majority of Canadians have drunk this Commie Kool-Aid, even so called Conservatives

they simply lack the self awareness to even notice

Edited October 7, 2022 by Dougie93

[ironstone]

3 hours ago, West said:

Where do you stand on socialism? Failed experiment that leads to death, high inflation and poverty or have we just not tried the right kind?

I'm in the failed experiment side. I don't buy into the Scandanavian angle that is always pushed by the leftists either. Those countries are capitalist that happen to have very generous social programs. It goes by different names but at the end of the day it has never worked out for the people. Now it's a disgusting cocktail of socialism/communism/woke ideology that is poisoning western society.

 

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

Socialism is the mechanism that supposedly leads to the perfectly egalitarian post scarcity Communist Utopia

it inevitably fails, as all Utopianism does

but Canadians are deluded as to the actual nature of Socialism

Canadians believe Socialism is a political ideology, when really it is religion

Socialism has become the state religion of Canada

and that is how Canada has become a Communist country for all intents & purposes

Communism isn't really about economics

Communism is simply a faith in the Hegelian myth that we are all on a path to a Utopia

you will see Canadians constantly engaged in the Hegelian Dialectic therein

this is where the Socialists are convinced, that if they just get rid of all the non believers

then their Utopia will be at hand somehow

notice that you can't debate with a Socialist, you can't negotiate with a Socialist

they are zealots : if you don't accept their faith, they will simply castigate you as an infidel

to a Socialist, if you're not a Socialist, then you're just evil, a bad person

the vast majority of Canadians have drunk this Commie Kool-Aid, even so called Conservatives

they simply lack the self awareness to even notice

Well I do think Canada is straddling the fence between being a client state of China and a vassal protectorate of America right now under Trudeau.  Junior Trudeau is trying to make it seem as though Canada is a utopian state, but it’s actually become a quasi left-wing woke green dictatorship.  It doesn’t have the healthcare system promised to make it safe and yet free, so when the pandemic hit hard we got draconian lockdowns, restrictions and mandates rather than front row access to vaccines and anti-virals.  The healthcare system simply couldn’t absorb the needs without totalitarian dictates.

We see similar problems with the attempt to appear perfectly feminist and anti-racist.  It plays out as loss of free speech and new forms of racism, such as discriminatory hiring based on preferred designated victim groups.  It’s an entirely Bolshevik form of oppressing those who are designated as privileged on the basis of race.  This discrimination is being upheld by our Liberal dominated court system and far left human rights tribunals. They are oppressive and unscientific, affirming activist statements such as a teacher telling a girl she isn’t a girl.

The green subsidies, carbon (human existence) taxes, and crushing regulations on resource development are economic oppression.

There’s very little evidence if any to say whether any of these policies are making any measurable improvements to our world, but there’s plenty of evidence that people are struggling financially, are unable to get effective healthcare, and are feeling made to publicly present viewpoints that they know are unjust in order to keep their jobs and reputations.  This is Justin Trudeau’s Canada.

With regard to Hegel, his was actually a religious philosophy about the working out of Spirit in the world. Teihard de Jardin, the Christian philosopher, held similar views.  Where it becomes dark is the way in which Marx turned it upside down, made it materialist, and replaced Spirit with what would become the Vanguard of the Proletariat, a kind of politician god like Mao who tells us all how we should live.  Clearly that’s a recipe for dystopia.

Humans must have checks and balances to their authority because human nature tends towards abuse of power.  I’d say that J. Trudeau entered that authoritarian zone from late 2021, perhaps much earlier.  He certainly didn’t respect MP’s voting with their conscience or the individual rights protected by our Constitution.  People who don’t see that are a threat to liberal-democracy.  Unfortunately many Canadians don’t see the damage he has done to democracy in Canada.  I was never right wing.  I was a member of the Liberal Party for years.  I can tell you this is not Chrétien’s Liberal Party anymore, not even close.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Aristides]

Socialism covers a huge range. CPP, OAS,  medicare and in the US, Social Security and Medicaid are all socialism. I think most people would agree that extremes, whether it is socialism or libertarianism are not desirable.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Aristides

[West]

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

Socialism covers a huge range. CPP, OAS,  medicare and in the US, Social Security and Medicaid are all socialism. I think most people would agree that extremes, whether it is socialism or libertarianism are not desirable.

We saw what socialized medicine gave us. We all had to hide out in the bunker for two years and wear a diaper on our face because of a slight (debatable) increase in hospitalizations

[Aristides]

57 minutes ago, West said:

We saw what socialized medicine gave us. We all had to hide out in the bunker for two years and wear a diaper on our face because of a slight (debatable) increase in hospitalizations

How was that different from the US?

[Moonlight Graham]

4 hours ago, Aristides said:

Socialism covers a huge range. CPP, OAS,  medicare and in the US, Social Security and Medicaid are all socialism. I think most people would agree that extremes, whether it is socialism or libertarianism are not desirable.

I dunno if CPP is socialism.  I pay into it.  It's more a program to prevent mass starvation of old people who were too stupid to save/invest money when they worked for when they retire.  CPP is stupidity insurance.

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, Aristides said:

How was that different from the US?

They had to pay out of pocket for Covid treatment.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, Aristides said:

Socialism covers a huge range. CPP, OAS,  medicare and in the US, Social Security and Medicaid are all socialism. I think most people would agree that extremes, whether it is socialism or libertarianism are not desirable.

Sort of.  This is the bare minimum of social safety net as exists in the US.  

Arguably, these were introduced for working people as a response to socialism.

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

They had to pay out of pocket for Covid treatment.

That’s untrue.  The Americans got their Covid shots free and sooner than Canadians.  Our Canadian healthcare generosity story is pretty exaggerated.  

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

That’s untrue.  The Americans got their Covid shots free and sooner than Canadians.  Our Canadian healthcare generosity story is pretty exaggerated.  

Not shots, treatment for the afflicted.

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

That’s untrue.  The Americans got their Covid shots free and sooner than Canadians.  Our Canadian healthcare generosity story is pretty exaggerated.  

Here's a story about a man who got $1 million in bills from his father who died of Covid

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/upshot/covid-bills-financial-long-haulers.html

[West]

9 hours ago, Aristides said:

How was that different from the US?

Lots of places didn't lock down in the US

[Zeitgeist]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Not shots, treatment for the afflicted.

I think you need to present evidence to back your assertion.  Covid treatment appeared equally universally accessible in the US and it came sooner with more current meds and procedures.  

[Zeitgeist]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Here's a story about a man who got $1 million in bills from his father who died of Covid

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/upshot/covid-bills-financial-long-haulers.html

Sounds like our catastrophic drug cost stories.  I know what you’re trying to say, but in the end our healthcare capacity couldn’t manage a pandemic without de facto totalitarian lockdowns.  

[Moonbox]

11 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I dunno if CPP is socialism.  I pay into it.  It's more a program to prevent mass starvation of old people who were too stupid to save/invest money when they worked for when they retire.  CPP is stupidity insurance.

So a social benefit.  Problem with "socialism" is that it's become a bogeyman term for fools to throw around, with it essentially meaning an out-co-control welfare state.  CPP, worker's comp, OAS, public healthcare, municipal transit, publicly funded educated etc are all socialism.  The word doesn't actually mean what all of the clowns figure it does.  

[Infidel Dog]

Traditionally Socialism was this:

Quote

socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism

Then Progs decided the definition didn't suit their argument so they decided to do their redefiney thing and all of a sudden if you wanted Police and a fire department you were calling for socialism.

And if you didn't think so you were a "fool" and a "clown."

Personally I think if you swallow that you're a naive, malleable, no-nothing. Socialism sucks.

[eyeball]

31 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

Do you believe every single thing on the planet should be privatized?

If you don't you're a commie.

[Moonlight Graham]

33 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Traditionally Socialism was this:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism

Then Progs decided the definition didn't suit their argument so they decided to do their redefiney thing and all of a sudden if you wanted Police and a fire department you were calling for socialism.

And if you didn't think so you were a "fool" and a "clown."

Personally I think if you swallow that you're a naive, malleable, no-nothing. Socialism sucks.

The fire dept is socialism.  Public ownership for the benefit of all, exactly what your definition says.

If you like fire dept socialism but not health care socialism that's simply your subjective bias, but they are the same.  If you want private fire dept that's totally possible.   Call up a company to put out your fire for you for a fee.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Moonlight Graham

[Infidel Dog]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The fire dept is socialism.  Public ownership for the benefit of all, exactly what your definition says.

If you like fire dept socialism but not health care socialism that's simply your subjective bias, but they are the same.  If you want private fire dept that's totally possible.   Call up a company to put out your fire for you for a fee.

I love the way you guys will lasso the ugly lame little calf out of context and bulk of content then present it as the whole herd of a selection of quoted paragraphs.

How about this bit you prefer we'd ignore:

Quote

social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. 

I'm not sure how that makes police and the fire department socialist. Know why? Because it doesn't.

Nor does this:

Quote

Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

Notice the emboldened bits. They tell us what's wrong with your idea if you want a fire department you're a socialist.

Socialism is a doctrine that "calls for" control over "everything that people produce" as well as their property and it tells anyone that might benefit from your loss they are entitled to it. Equity, you see. Which means government tells you who will own and do what with you or your property to keep things their version of equal.

You can have a fire department and still have choice. You can agree to a social contract where the broad based policy is equality of opportunity within a society. Equity does away with that. It decides on who gets what or does what, based on a proposed government approved outcome.

It's the difference between a fire department and a teacher, as a matter of policy, deciding your child's gender regardless of your wishes.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Infidel Dog

[Moonlight Graham]

20 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

I love the way you guys will lasso the ugly lame little calf out of context and bulk of content then present it as the whole herd of a selection of quoted paragraphs.

How about this bit you prefer we'd ignore:

I'm not sure how that makes police and the fire department socialist. Know why? Because it doesn't.

Nor does this:

Notice the emboldened bits. They tell us what's wrong with your idea if you want a fire department you're a socialist.

Socialism is a doctrine that "calls for" control over "everything that people produce" as well as their property and it tells anyone that might benefit from your loss they are entitled to it. Equity, you see. Which means government tells you who will own and do what with you or your property to keep things their version of equal.

You can have a fire department and still have choice. You can agree to a social contract where the broad based policy is equality of opportunity within a society. Equity does away with that. It decides on who gets what or does what, based on a proposed government approved outcome.

It's the difference between a fire department and a teacher, as a matter of policy, deciding your child's gender regardless of your wishes.

Public fire dept is just one industry that is socialized.  Canada has some industries that are socialized and most that aren't.  Different countries have different levels of a socialized economy.  Pretty much all countries have some level of socialism, it is a matter of degrees and which and how many industries.

[Infidel Dog]

There are no "levels" of Socialism if you're talking about the actual definitions.

If want to start manipulating and reforming that definition to create a new prog-approved redefinition then I guess you could start massaging in more convenient terminology like "Democratic Socialism" or "Socialized economy."

But they're not actual socialism.

Actually I do it too. I have one I like as an alternate to Progressivism. I sometimes call it Progressive Socialism. Because that's the only real movement of progression in Progressivism.

[ExFlyer]

6 hours ago, West said:

Lots of places didn't lock down in the US

BS. Name them.

[West]

49 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

BS. Name them.

Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.