[NYCFarmboy]

notice that they both look very happy holding that.

[NYCFarmboy]

maybe that is why they were smiling?

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy

notice that they both look very happy holding that.

It takes little to please an old man...

[Doofy]

Right, so that proves that socialism is crap.

All that power Casto has and he couldn't even muster enough resources to get a set of olive drab pyjamas made.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Right, so that proves that socialism is crap.

All that power Casto has and he couldn't even muster enough resources to get a set of olive drab pyjamas made.

They are re-affirming their solidarity to the old school Commies...you know. The REDS? Also, look at Fidel lovingly gaze at whozits.

[Spliffdaddy]

Castro, minutes before entering the operating room where he died during surgery.

[davesimondotcom]

I wonder if Fidel ever wears those T-Shirts with Che printed on them...

Seriously though, Fidel doesn't look all that animated in that - is there video of this meeting? It looks like they could have posed Castro's corpse looking up at Chavez...

[Spliffdaddy]

now there's a missed opportunity to snuff out the lives of 2 brutal dictators.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

now there's a missed opportunity to snuff out the lives of 2 brutal dictators.

I see Castro but where's the other one ? Surely you don't mean Chavez. Call it bribery if you like but he's used Venezuela's oil wealth (aided by the sky high price of oil right now) to provide free health care and education to millions of Venezuelans while keeping the domestic price of gas at 12 cents a gallon. "Dictator" implies the people don't have a choice ... Chavez has greater popular support than any other government head in the Western Hemisphere and receives a greater percentage of votes than any US president in history. What can you say ... he takes Venezuela's oil money and spreads it amongst the populous rather than to a few private corporate interests and the rank and file citizenry love him for it.

[RAILhead]

[besson3c]

I've never quite understood the negative knee-jerk reactions people still have to socialism and communism. I'm not suggesting that these sorts of govenments are ideal, but I'm happy to entertain these sorts of notions without getting emotionally worked up.

You can rant and rave about socialism being evil and blah blah blah, but our social security and medicaid programs are essentially socialist. If you really feel that strongly against socialism, give up these programs... then I'll listen to you a bit more earnestly.

I believe around 30% of our spending goes into a whole assortment of expenses outside of interest repayments and military spending. If you want to bitch about your hard earned tax dollars being spent on social programs, maybe we should focus more on not racking up such a huge debt, and spending boatloads of cash on military toys?

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Krusty

I see Castro but where's the other one ? Surely you don't mean Chavez. Call it bribery if you like but he's used Venezuela's oil wealth (aided by the sky high price of oil right now) to provide free health care and education to millions of Venezuelans while keeping the domestic price of gas at 12 cents a gallon. "Dictator" implies the people don't have a choice ... Chavez has greater popular support than any other government head in the Western Hemisphere and receives a greater percentage of votes than any US president in history. What can you say ... he takes Venezuela's oil money and spreads it amongst the populous rather than to a few private corporate interests and the rank and file citizenry love him for it.

I don't do this a lot, but…

*SMACKDOWN OF THE CENTURY*

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

I don't do this a lot, but…

*SMACKDOWN OF THE CENTURY*

Perhaps once every hundred years?

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Dakar

Perhaps once every hundred years?

Heh. Krusty's post was pretty good. We'll see.

[Zeeb]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I've never quite understood the negative knee-jerk reactions people still have to socialism and communism. I'm not suggesting that these sorts of govenments are ideal, but I'm happy to entertain these sorts of notions without getting emotionally worked up.

You can rant and rave about socialism being evil and blah blah blah, but our social security and medicaid programs are essentially socialist. If you really feel that strongly against socialism, give up these programs... then I'll listen to you a bit more earnestly.

I believe around 30% of our spending goes into a whole assortment of expenses outside of interest repayments and military spending. If you want to bitch about your hard earned tax dollars being spent on social programs, maybe we should focus more on not racking up such a huge debt, and spending boatloads of cash on military toys?

It's not so much a negative knee-jerk reaction to socialism or communism but to Castro as a dictator. Most modern examples of these two systems have been headed by murderous leaders who stay in power until they die or are overthrown.

[MinM]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I've never quite understood the negative knee-jerk reactions people still have to socialism and communism.

Do you not understand the knee-jerk reactions to Nazism either? Generally, ideologies that lead to oppression and the death of innocents are frowned upon.

You can rant and rave about socialism being evil and blah blah blah, but our social security and medicaid programs are essentially socialist. If you really feel that strongly against socialism, give up these programs...

I imagine most economic liberals would be pleased to see socialist programs like social security and medicaid eliminated.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MinM

Do you not understand the knee-jerk reactions to Nazism either? Generally, ideologies that lead to oppression and the death of innocents are frowned upon.

Socialism leads to oppression and the death of innocents? What about Sweden? Some would say that Canada is more Socialist on the overall scale than America is (and I would agree), would you say that Canadians are being oppressed and innocent people are being killed?

I imagine most economic liberals would be pleased to see socialist programs like social security and medicaid eliminated.

Economic liberals? What exactly is an economic liberal? Why would they like for these programs to be eliminated?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

I don't do this a lot, but…

*SMACKDOWN OF THE CENTURY*

Your imitation reminds me of the guy who answers, "GRACK to the Future" in the GREAT Comcast ("Comtastic") TV spots featuring Mr. T!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zo1FIIiQHc

GRACKdown of the Century.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Krusty

I see Castro but where's the other one ? Surely you don't mean Chavez. Call it bribery if you like but he's used Venezuela's oil wealth (aided by the sky high price of oil right now) to provide free health care and education to millions of Venezuelans while keeping the domestic price of gas at 12 cents a gallon. "Dictator" implies the people don't have a choice ... Chavez has greater popular support than any other government head in the Western Hemisphere and receives a greater percentage of votes than any US president in history. What can you say ... he takes Venezuela's oil money and spreads it amongst the populous rather than to a few private corporate interests and the rank and file citizenry love him for it.

Well said, and very true. Whatever Chavez is, he has the support of his people being it. He's a commie and a socialist and a bit strange, but the people seem to like it. That's democracy. For instance the people in the US elected a paranoid alcoholic who hears the voice of God and it tells him to go to war.

You know.. but that's democracy for you. The people get the leader they deserve.

V

[Rumor]

Um, what is he holding?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Rumor

Um, what is he holding?

Not sure, but to me it looks like a sugar cane. Or a medieval butt plug.

[MinM]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Socialism leads to oppression and the death of innocents?

Certainly. Hitler's National Socialist movement, the Soviet Empire, China, Cuba...the list goes on and on.

(and before you ask incredulously, communism indeed falls under the umbrella of socialism)

Economic liberals? What exactly is an economic liberal?

Here, and more specifically, here.

More than anything else in politics today, the highjacking by the socialist left of the descriptor "liberal" amuses me.

Why would they like for these programs to be eliminated?

Because they generally believe in economic privatization.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by MinM

Certainly. Hitler's National Socialist movement, the Soviet Empire, China, Cuba...the list goes on and on.

(and before you ask incredulously, communism indeed falls under the umbrella of socialism)

This is so dumb

Anybody who knows anything would agree that communism is part of socialism, because *hey* that's where it came from!!! Originally.

Wow, I mean.. STOP THE PRESS! Communism falls under the umbrella of socialism??? Gosh darn.

The incredible thing is that you try to put the Nazis under 'the socialist' umbrella. It's just a name. They hated socialists and communists more than the Jews.

Tell me, is the Democratic party made up of people fighting for democracy? Is the Republican party made up of people fighting for a republic?

They are names. Actions are what matters.

In Denmark the Venstre party (literally Leftist party) is the far right party, akin to the Tories in the UK. But wait! They are called the Leftist party!! Surely they must be socialists

V

[D. S. Troyer]

That's not a stick. That's a very big spliff!! Light 'er up Fidel. Cure all your ills

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Doesn't mean sh1t to me.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MinM

Certainly. Hitler's National Socialist movement, the Soviet Empire, China, Cuba...the list goes on and on.

(and before you ask incredulously, communism indeed falls under the umbrella of socialism)

This conversation seems to have broken down. You ignored my exceptions I pointed out, and made a very broad generalization. There is a difference between these governments. The dichotomy is not democracy and everything that is not a democracy.

Before you start freaking out and thinking that I'm defending the virtues of non-democratic governments, again, I'm just saying that I don't know why people become so irrational about this sort of stuff. We need some socialist-type social programs in our country, and perhaps there is a time for the powers of a State to flex their muscles (e.g. vetoing a bill).

Really, what you have is a 4x4 grid you can use to place somebody's sensabilities that includes socialism, perhaps Marxism, communism, totalitarianism, anarchy, etc. We are not even a pure democracy, but a representative democracy. Our political sensibilities fall somewhere on this grid, and this probably varies from issue to issue. Everything isn't black and white my dear.

[pooka]

What is up with the Chavez star****ing? Seriously, it boggles my mind how this *********, who ASPIRES to be like his dictator4life boyfriends, is given soooooo much praise for being a big ole douche. From reading this thread I'm to assume that he has something like a 94% approval rating and is showered with roses when he walks the streets.

Biggie Props™ for the man giving back to his people. I guess, in most peeps eyes, since he gives Dubya the finger, everything else is cool. But I know, he's not really that bad. It's the liberal media that lies and distorts in order to remove him from office. You know, since they're controlled by Washington.. who's also wants to assassinate him.. so he needs more guns.. and planes.. and stuff... so he needs to sell more oil... on the global market... so he can buy more guns..

[Sky Captain]

Didn't Chavez seize the refineries and the oil fields?

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally Posted by pooka

What is up with the Chavez star****ing? Seriously, it boggles my mind how this *********, who ASPIRES to be like his dictator4life boyfriends, is given soooooo much praise for being a big ole douche. From reading this thread I'm to assume that he has something like a 94% approval rating and is showered with roses when he walks the streets.

Biggie Props™ for the man giving back to his people. I guess, in most peeps eyes, since he gives Dubya the finger, everything else is cool. But I know, he's not really that bad. It's the liberal media that lies and distorts in order to remove him from office. You know, since they're controlled by Washington.. who's also wants to assassinate him.. so he needs more guns.. and planes.. and stuff... so he needs to sell more oil... on the global market... so he can buy more guns..

the facination on the left with Chavez is quite amusing considering his "democratic" credentials (not).

[MinM]

Originally Posted by besson3c

This conversation seems to have broken down.

Frankly, this conversation never had a chance, because...

There is a difference between these governments. The dichotomy is not democracy and everything that is not a democracy.

...I'm not sure you even understand what we're discussing. We are not talking about a dichotomy between socialism/communism/economic statism and democracy, because the two are apples and oranges. The former is an economic ideology, while the latter is a political system.

Before you start freaking out and thinking that I'm defending the virtues of non-democratic governments...

Again, you're not defending non-democratic governments, you're defending an economic ideology that frequently leads to non-democratic governments.

...I'm just saying that I don't know why people become so irrational about this sort of stuff.

And I explained why. What is there that all in the Western world share if not a desire to control our own destinies? Socialism/communism/economic statism, when fully realized, denies us this.

We need some socialist-type social programs in our country

What you fail to realize (or simply ignore) is that there are economic ideologies whose proponents believe we don't need such programs.

and perhaps there is a time for the powers of a State to flex their muscles (e.g. vetoing a bill).

Again, you seem to be greatly confused about the difference between economic ideology and political systems. Vetoing a bill has nothing to do with economic ideology.

We are not even a pure democracy, but a representative democracy.

Here are some terms to look up in whatever research texts you might utilize:

Democracy
Autocracy
Monarchy
Theocracy
Totalitarianism
Capitalism
Anarcho-capitalism
Minarchism
Socialism
Communism
Statism

Everything isn't black and white my dear.

"My dear?" Good lord...I've never seen a post that showed such a clear lack of understanding of the subject matter at hand end so self-satisfyingly.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by MinM

Again, you're not defending non-democratic governments, you're defending an economic ideology that frequently leads to non-democratic governments.

Dude, if you could find a way of explaining that to the folks who vote socialist in a way that their simple minds could comprehend, we'd be free of the left for ever.

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by besson3c

We are not even a pure democracy, but a representative democracy.

The USA is a representative republic.
Democracy in it's truest form is mob rule.

This way, areas of minority can acrually have a larger voice than the majority.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by MinM

And I explained why. What is there that all in the Western world share if not a desire to control our own destinies? Socialism/communism/economic statism, when fully realized, denies us this.

And so does capitalism, when you really think about it (and yes, capitalism is a political ideology in this day and age).

Some will always defend capitalism against different forms of socialism, because they think that this will give people in general the most freedom possible to take control of their own destinies – this, of course, couldn't be further from the truth.

[MinM]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

And so does capitalism, when you really think about it.

No, it doesn't.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by MinM

No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does.

/I'll be here for a few more minutes.

[MinM]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Yes, it does.

Please explain how a system with minimal state intervention leaves individuals less free to control their destinies than does a system with extensive state intervention.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by Rumor

Um, what is he holding?

Spirit Stick. Can't let it hit the ground or they'll be cursed. Didn't you ever get dragged kicking and screaming to watch Bring It On? (I didn't kick or scream that hard, after all, cute chicks in short skirts, can't be that bad.)

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by MinM

Please explain how a system with minimal state intervention leaves individuals less free to control their destinies than does a system with extensive state intervention.

Easy, one system only gives you minimal choices of self expression, and might require you to give up your free will in order to be able to maintain and lead a healthy and productive life.

More socialist systems OTOH, could enable a person to be more productive and realize his/her full potential, but don't necessarily do so.

In the end, it just boils down to what type of person you are.

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

YMMV.

[MinM]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Easy, one system only gives you minimal choices of self expression

This can't be capitalism. A free and open marketplace of ideas, goods, and services offers unlimited choices of self expression.

and might require you to give up your free will in order to be able to maintain and lead a healthy and productive life.

This makes little sense. How can one give up one's free will in a free market?

In the end, it just boils down to what type of person you are.

This I agree with, given that one system offers the ability to control your own destiny, while one promises to control it for you.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Doesn't mean sh1t to me.

But you certainly mean sh1t to me.

[Rumor]

Someone needs to photoshop some funnies into this picture..

[analogika]

Originally Posted by MinM

This can't be capitalism. A free and open marketplace of ideas, goods, and services offers unlimited choices of self expression.

Unless those conflict with somebody else's choices, of course.

Which they necessarily will, unless you live, self-subsistent, in a log cabin out in the woods. Hardly capitalistic, and still at the mercy of money-grubbing industrials who'll log the woods you live off and poison the river you fish.

Your ideology is just as naïve and breaks down just as badly when put into practise as the ones you decry, yet apparently have significant difficulty to distinguish.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by analogika

Unless those conflict with somebody else's choices, of course.

Which they necessarily will, unless you live, self-subsistent, in a log cabin out in the woods. Hardly capitalistic, and still at the mercy of money-grubbing industrials who'll log the woods you live off and poison the river you fish.

Bleh. Always with the useless, extreme hypothetical examples. There’s the respect of rule of law, private property rights, a legal system, and a host of other protections that make it possible (duh) to live in a log cabin out in the woods if you so choose, or anywhere else, and maintain your freedom of self-expression.

You’re far more likely to have (what you thought was) your property stolen right out from under you with no adequate compensation by greedy socialist busybodies who’ve decided for you that you don’t “need” what you have, and that don’t even have the slightest concept of private property or individual rights. And sure, Cubans feel free to exercise their freedom of expression to criticize the Castro regime- if they enjoy being beaten and thrown into prison, if not murdered.

edit: "live" in a log cabin, though you're free to "love" in one too.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Bleh. Always with the useless, extreme hypothetical examples. There’s the respect of rule of law, private property rights, a legal system, and a host of other protections that make it possible (duh) to love in a log cabin out in the woods if you so choose, or anywhere else, and maintain your freedom of self-expression.

Well, that was exactly my point.

It isn't just a "free and open marketplace of ideas, goods, and services offers unlimited choices of self expression" - there's a bunch of safeguards and regulatory devices implemented IN REALITY.

As different from MinM's naïve little fantasy ideology of capitalism as the reality of Swedish everyday life is from his bizarre 1984 concept of social democracy.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by analogika

Well, that was exactly my point.

It isn't just a "free and open marketplace of ideas, goods, and services offers unlimited choices of self expression" - there's a bunch of safeguards and regulatory devices implemented IN REALITY.

I guess I missed the part where MinM stated that capitalism doesn't have safeguards and regulatory devices.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by MinM

This can't be capitalism. A free and open marketplace of ideas, goods, and services offers unlimited choices of self expression.

I think you have a very limited understanding of 'unlimited'

Originally Posted by MinM

This makes little sense. How can one give up one's free will in a free market?

Easy, by being forced to do something that is 'marketable'. By being forced to comply with social standards etc.

Originally Posted by MinM

This I agree with, given that one system offers the ability to control your own destiny, while one promises to control it for you.

How can something 'control' your destiny?

You're always free to do whatever you want, it's the consequences of your actions that matter.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by mojo2

But you certainly mean sh1t to me.

Enough to keep replying to my posts.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

I guess I missed the part where MinM stated that capitalism doesn't have safeguards and regulatory devices.

I guess you missed the "UNLIMITED choices of self-expression".

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c

You can rant and rave about socialism being evil and blah blah blah, but our social security and medicaid programs are essentially socialist. If you really feel that strongly against socialism, give up these programs... then I'll listen to you a bit more earnestly.

Basic lesson on American government: Many Americans do wish to end the social welfare state. The problem is, nearly half the country likes it (or, at least, likes the status quo), and any attempt to reform the system is shut down by powerful interest groups and the spineless and/or corrupt officials in their pockets.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Basic lesson on American government: Many Americans do wish to end the social welfare state.

What kind of viable alternative do they have in mind?

/honest question
//please note the term 'viable' here