Should Communism Be Declared A Criminal Ideology?

[Animavore]

Speaking of oil, it seems an over dependence on selling this commodity while importing everything else is somewhat to blame.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.bbc.com ... a-36319877

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.bbc.com ... a-36319877

[laklak]

As in almost everything there's a middle road, but we seem unable to embrace it. It's like politics here. You are either a snowflake SJW or a racist Nazi. Anyone advocating a more centrist, nuanced approach is shouted down by both sides.

[Sean Hayden]

Honestly, the only excuse I've heard is well that's not TRUE socialism. WTF is it, then?

That's not the only excuse you've heard. I said other factors are involved in a country's successes and failures besides whether or not they happen to be socialist. I don't even have to give another factor here, I can just point to other socialists who haven't destroyed their country. Or to how the US has escaped failure or been elevated because of something other than capitalism.

To me it is reasonable to believe that a nation can fail under any system.

[Animavore]

Middle roads can only work if the country is already moderate in general, I think. In Ireland all our main parties float around the centre and your not being asked to sacrifice everything you hold dear to meet the other side halfway when they're not that far from you. In the US, where the right has taken an extreme turn, it's very hard to ask even moderates to compromise with people who want to destroy advances in equality and civil rights and seem determined to create a Christian theocracy if allowed and refuses to disown white supremacists, domestic terrorists, and other extremists in their midst. I don't even know how you would begin to compromise with people of such narrow and staunch beliefs.

Defeating them in the polls and allowing their numbers decrease to irrelevance as they die out and their children abandon their hateful ideologies out of embarrassment seems to be the only way out.

[laklak]

Agreed. But it is also impossible, for me in any case, to support things like abolishing border controls, expanding already broke programs like Medicare to cover the entire population, abolishing private ownership of firearms, and other far left ideologies. Those are extreme positions not espoused by the vast majority of Democrats, just as white supremacy and domestic terrorism are not espoused by the vast majority of Republicans. What actual numbers support either of those fringe positions is unknown, in part because our media only seems to report on the extremes. In my admittedly anecdotal experiences there are none, I know no one who supports either extreme, not a single person. I know people from a wide range of political beliefs, and they are for the most part in agreement on major issues. Everyone I know is a social liberal, and if not a fiscal "conservative" then at least a fiscal realist. They may differ on exactly how to reach those goals, but the gap between them is nowhere near what is generally portrayed by the media. I actually blame the media, both right and left leaning, for a lot of our problems.

[Forty Two]

As in almost everything there's a middle road, but we seem unable to embrace it. It's like politics here. You are either a snowflake SJW or a racist Nazi. Anyone advocating a more centrist, nuanced approach is shouted down by both sides.

Centrist in America is Nazi in the "rest of the world."

America is so far right that Alexandria Ocasio-Corteth would be a fascist in western Europe.

[Animavore]

Gun control extreme? Not as extreme as the mounting bodies from gun violence IMO. But what do I know? I just a European from a country which doesn't suffer from constant and extreme acts of mass violence.

[Forty Two]

I read many countries have had socialist leaders at various times. Some have succeeded and some haven't.

Even without researching anything though, it's perfectly possible to imagine many things influence the successes or failures of a nation at any period in time besides whether they happen to be socialist or not.

The US has come close to failure many times. This gets back to what I said before about americans being unable or unwilling to see the role pure dumb luck has played in their successes. Diving deeper into the details, I think it would be very difficult, if not impossible to credit something as broad as capitalism for the times when we climbed out of a hole or were elevated in the ranks of world power.

Having a socialist leader doesn't mean the country has a socialist economy. There is no place where socialism as an economic system has been tried where it hasn't resulted in more poverty for the people, oppression, loss of civil liberties, etc.

I agree wholeheartedly, it is perfectly possible to imagine many things that influence the successes or failures of a nation at any period in time besides whether they happen to be socialist or not. However, reality tends to be a tad narrower than the full extent of human imagination.

Moreover, I had to spit out my beverage at the turn of phrase "happen to be socialist." Oh, yes, it's not a socialist country. It's a country that "happens to be socialist." Like, he's not a gay. He's a person, that happens to be gay.

I do agree that Americans, like everyone else in the world, are unable and unwilling - in large part - to see the role luck plays in their nations' successes. Every western country has walked a knife edge, and could well have have lost it all at some time or another, generally multiple times. Modern civilization exists on a very thin foundation. Just a month without electricity in the US would likely end the nation, and spark massive civil war.

Capitalism need not be credited for the success of the US. The reality is that all capitalism is is liberal democracy applied to the economic sphere. It's freedom. Capitalism is the economic system where the means of production of goods and services and property in general is held in private hands, rather than the State. That means that individuals do, generally, what they please with their own property, and they are generally allowed to do what they want on the terms they voluntarily agree to, including buying and selling things or services. That's what capitalism is. Socialism, on the other hand, takes property and the means of production and places it in the hands of the State, so that whatever system exists for determining what States do end up determining what the people/citizens do with their things and services. In socialism, the individual doesn't get to have a dream to become the maker of widgets and create a new system to make better and cheaper widgets and sell them to others to make money. That's for the State to decide what the State thinks is necessary to make. If the State (through whatever political process exists there) thinks widgets don't need to be made, then the new widget idea would not be lawful to go forward. The State determines what the wannabe widget maker does with his economic life.

That's oppression. Socialism is oppression. You cannot have Socialism economically and have people deciding for themselves what to make and sell. Then it's not socialism, because if people decide for themselves, then the means of production is not held by the State. QED.

[Seabass]

I actually blame the media, both right and left leaning, for a lot of our problems.

A recent Harvard study says right media is far, far worse:
http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 9#p1799549

The trouble with the msm is that it is ratings driven. They tend to be good (but not perfect, obviously) in terms of factual accuracy, but they tend to cover what is sensational rather than what’s important. The trouble with the right-wing media, in the US at least, is that it is all ideological horseshit that’s rooted in outmoded supernatural and racist hogwash.

Nearly half the country is more concerned about a friggin' caravan than climate change. That is seriously, seriously fucked up.

[Animavore]

In Ireland we used to watch Fox when we want a good laugh thinking it was a joke. Wasn't so funny when we found out millions take it seriously.

[Forty Two]

I actually blame the media, both right and left leaning, for a lot of our problems.

A recent Harvard study says right media is far, far worse:

The Harvard Study says the Right Wing media is far far worse than the Left Wing media? You mean, media that leans left does so without actually leaning left?

You see, the only way media leans a certain way is by being biased. If it wasn't biased, it would not be leaning left or right.

[laklak]

I don't really care what Harvard comes up with, or honestly any poll or study conducted by pretty much anyone. I have eyes, am reasonably intelligent, reasonably well informed, and capable of reaching my own conclusions. What's "right wing media", anyway? Breitbart? Infowars? I'm talking about CNN, MSNBC, Fox, and other mainstream outlets that the (again) vast majority of people use. Just read the headlines with a non-biased and critical eye. Some tilt left, some tilt right, and ALL point fingers at each other. ALL report on the extremes. That's because if they reported on what people actually thought or believed it would be boring as shit.

I honestly don't know where y'all live, because I haven't seen any of the sort of shit that gets reported on a daily basis. I've seen no Nazis, I've seen no Commies, I've never seen a Klansman or a radical SJW. I see people going about their daily lives, going to work, paying their bills, going to church (or not), eating at restaurants, washing their cars. I see black people talking to white people talking to Hispanic people talking to Asian people. I see women in head scarves shopping in Publix. I see kids from all backgrounds and races playing together. I see my neighbors, who are white, black, Hispanic, and Asian, all living together in this little neighborhood. It isn't perfect, yeah there are problems, but it isn't the dire, apocalyptic, end of the world scenario so many people in the media and politics push so hard.

[Animavore]

Fox isn't mainstream at all. It's a propoganda mill which has no problem telling blatant lies and creating hysteria.

[JimC]

There's plenty of other South American countries which show complete capitalism can be a complete disaster. Bolivia and Chile for instance.

History proves unfettered capitalism is completely unsustainable as corruption and abuse pile on top of each other and inequality grows rampant until a revolution or World War levels the playing field.

Capitalism isn't all that and a strict, dogmatic adherence to its supposed virtue is no less religious than being a Communist.

Is capitalism more unfettered in those South American countries than the US? I think that their problems are more to do with corruption, appalling governments and the poverty that is a legacy of their colonial past.

[Animavore]

There's plenty of other South American countries which show complete capitalism can be a complete disaster. Bolivia and Chile for instance.

History proves unfettered capitalism is completely unsustainable as corruption and abuse pile on top of each other and inequality grows rampant until a revolution or World War levels the playing field.

Capitalism isn't all that and a strict, dogmatic adherence to its supposed virtue is no less religious than being a Communist.

Is capitalism more unfettered in those South American countries than the US? I think that their problems are more to do with corruption, appalling governments and the poverty that is a legacy of their colonial past.

I think their problems are to do with the US.