• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Go to trump rally or don't get paid

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Nope. You made no argument to counter my point.

Yes, I did. You just missed it. Fascism is not, nor has it ever been, an offshoot of socialism. It may come from the same tree (just as our own liberal democracy), but they are vastly different branches. You agreed with that point, so therefore you have agreed that your earlier point was incorrect.

It is called tyranny of the majority.

Half the US population didn't vote. Think about it.

So, you're against the current US political system?

History. All socialist nations have failed.

Assertion without evidence.

Assertion with no evidence.

That was my observation. You can play dumb if you want to, but we both know that I'm right on this point.

So? I am pointing out the most successful nations on the planet have social programs and use capitalism to fund it. The USSR had bread lines....

We don't have very good social programs in the U.S., and they're more a waste of money and a source of corruption than anything to truly help people. In contrast, the USSR had free healthcare, which we do not. The USSR had free higher education, which we do not. The USSR had the largest army, while our army couldn't defeat tiny North Korea or North Vietnam. You call that "success"?

I've been to the USSR, and never once did I see a "bread line." Their system may not have been as luxurious as ours, but it was certainly functional. Their main problem wasn't so much due to socialism as much as it was due to Russian imperialism, against which the non-Russian nationalities rebelled. That's what brought about the collapse, but as we can see today, Russia is still a viable nation which causes conniptions among the US elite over various things (such as allegedly interfering in US elections).

Assertion regarding the cause of the decline.

Well, your point here is that socialist nations fail, while capitalist nations are successful. If this is true, then the US would not be facing the problems we're facing now.

You are talking about America. At no point did I say I was. The subject has gone beyond America as per the first reply you made to this chain had nothing to do with America. Now go be a good boy and go read the comment chain again. You have lost track of the conversation. Try again son.

The comment chain started with your erroneous assertion that fascism is an offshoot of socialism, which we now both agree was incorrect.

Apart from that, you're using stale old McCarthyite talking points and expecting to rest on that.

And you're wrong: Every debate about socialism vs. capitalism occurs within the background of US politics and proposals to make the US more socialist. You're using examples of other countries as an attempt to argue against socialist policies in the US, but this is an irrelevant and disingenuous line of argumentation.

Your assertion that the USSR had bread lines is an attempt to imply that, if the US adopts socialism, then the US would have bread lines, too. I don't see any basis for such a conclusion, so if you have more to offer to support your claim, I'd like to see it.
 

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
Wrong. USSR used Russian nationalism in WW2 and forced in upon it's puppet states like Poland by mandating Russia being taught as a second language. Try again.
Hardly. Liberals support speech laws which are not person nor social freedoms but repression of both. After all only 1 nation has free speech and it isn't a liberal bastion. Seems like you never bother to actually look around at which side supports which policy.

That is not limited to the left, silly person.

Nationalism is neither left nor right wing. A secondary factor is what makes a form of nationalism left or right.

The left is not interested in limited or tribal boundaries.

All religions not merely those that a person dislikes. Try again. Opium of the masses. Heard that saying?

Fundamentalists of any religion think theirs is the only true one and their god is the only true god. Opium of the masses just meant that it lulls people into not fighting for the good now in favor of heaven later. This is true. This is why the religious right is not interested in helping people now, they are mostly interested in proselytizing, telling people it's okay to suffer now because they will be happy in heaven for eternity. Ugh.
 

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
Workers party, left-wing. State over the individual, left-wing. Social Darwinism, left-wing. Eugenicists, left-wing. Engels babbled about Europeans have knowledge due to inheritance that an 8 year old can understand math axioms an "Australian Negro (his words)" has trouble learning with evidence being provided. Che called "the Negro is indolent, lazy and wastes money while Europeans are forward-looking, organized and intelligent". Try again

The Worker's party was not left wing. Social Darwinism is not a left thing either. Where do you get your information? I know neither side wants to identify with Nazis, but we should be able to find left and right groups from the past that are reprehensible. Just because Nazis are on the right doesn't mean that most GOP espouse these views. Of course they don't. The far right extreme minority does but I don't think most mainstream GOP agrees with them. Socialists don't like Communists much, but will admit that Communism is on the left.
 

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
Hardly. Liberals support speech laws which are not person nor social freedoms but repression of both. After all only 1 nation has free speech and it isn't a liberal bastion. Seems like you never bother to actually look around at which side supports which policy.

It's not left wing teachers that force children to stand for The Pledge or punish children who don't stand.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
The Worker's party was not left wing. Social Darwinism is not a left thing either. Where do you get your information? I know neither side wants to identify with Nazis, but we should be able to find left and right groups from the past that are reprehensible. Just because Nazis are on the right doesn't mean that most GOP espouse these views. Of course they don't. The far right extreme minority does but I don't think most mainstream GOP agrees with them. Socialists don't like Communists much, but will admit that Communism is on the left.

I think that nationalism and capitalism share a common thread in Social Darwinism. Both are fiercely competitive and subscribe to their own variations of "survival of the fittest." Once that line is crossed and such a philosophy is considered acceptable in the eyes of the people, then there's no telling where it can go.

I agree that no one wants to identify with or be associated with the Nazis. Even the Nazis don't want to be associated with Nazis, which is kind of weird when you think about it.

Everyone does a lot of wordsmithing to try to escape being labeled as something horrible, but the result is endless and pointless bickering over what people want to use as labels to tar their opposition.

The result is that few people actually discuss ideas or philosophies anymore; it's all about arguing over labels and definitions.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
It's not left wing teachers that force children to stand for The Pledge or punish children who don't stand.

Both sides in the US did it due to the Cold War. The pledge was passed by a Democrat Congress.... The punishment was held up by a Democrat packed SCOTUS.... The only dissenting opinion was from a Republican.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
The Worker's party was not left wing. Social Darwinism is not a left thing either.

Worker's parties are left-wing. Eugenics was a progressive ergo left-wing idea at the time. Brush up on your history

Where do you get your information?

All over the place.

I know neither side wants to identify with Nazis, but we should be able to find left and right groups from the past that are reprehensible.

Sure.

Just because Nazis are on the right doesn't mean that most GOP espouse these views.

Sure

The far right extreme minority does but I don't think most mainstream GOP agrees with them. Socialists don't like Communists much, but will admit that Communism is on the left.

New Socialists do not like Communists as the Communist propaganda failed in the 70s. All the Western Communists couldn't handle that their utopian idea failed so rebranded themselves to create separation. Ergo the phase "Real communism hasn't been tried yet!"
 

Shad

Veteran Member
That is not limited to the left, silly person.

Except for the fact that current speech laws are supported far more by the left right now.



The left is not interested in limited or tribal boundaries.

Hardly.


Opium of the masses just meant that it lulls people into not fighting for the good now in favor of heaven later. This is true.

That is not what the phrase means.

This is why the religious right is not interested in helping people now, they are mostly interested in proselytizing, telling people it's okay to suffer now because they will be happy in heaven for eternity. Ugh.

Look at religious charities and try again. Up here two right-wing denominations feed the homeless population not government not some left-wing group.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Yes, I did. You just missed it.

No I rejected it.

Fascism is not, nor has it ever been, an offshoot of socialism.

Wrong as per both parties own rhetoric.

It may come from the same tree (just as our own liberal democracy), but they are vastly different branches.

That is an offshoot....



You agreed with that point, so therefore you have agreed that your earlier point was incorrect.

Nope. You just know what offshoot means as per the above blunder. You acknowledge it was an offshoot as per "It may come from the same tree"... Look up the word and try again.



So, you're against the current US political system?

No. I pointed out a majority believing X does not make it right. That is tyranny of the majority.



Assertion without evidence.

Cuban, failed. USSR, collapsed. China, switched to capitalism. Eastern Bloc, collapsed. NK, open air prison and failed states. Open a history book son.



That was my observation. You can play dumb if you want to, but we both know that I'm right on this point.

Nope you are still wrong. Try again. Less projection next time.



We don't have very good social programs in the U.S., and they're more a waste of money and a source of corruption than anything to truly help people.

BS. The US provides more for welfare than Canada does as per section 8 housing. Canadians get 700-800 CDN a month.. total for shelter and food. Hence why charities feed people up here not government. No food stamps either.

In contrast, the USSR had free healthcare, which we do not.

Free **** HC is nothing to brag about especially when the nation has bread lines.

The USSR had free higher education, which we do not.

**** education that is free is still ****. After all all those educated communists couldn't figure out their system is a fantasy nor stop the collapse of the system. Yawn.

The USSR had the largest army, while our army couldn't defeat tiny North Korea or North Vietnam. You call that "success"?

NK had aid from China. The US military was completely capable of destroying NK and China. The politicians didn't want to. You grasp of history is lacking.

USSR and Afghanistan *cough* Try again.

The US never fully committed to NV. Again the politicians held the military back refusing to use WW2 warfare.


I've been to the USSR, and never once did I see a "bread line."

You didn't look hard. The USSR had multiple famines. Figure it out.

Their system may not have been as luxurious as ours, but it was certainly functional.

Yes that's why the USSR exists now.... Oh wait.

Their main problem wasn't so much due to socialism as much as it was due to Russian imperialism, against which the non-Russian nationalities rebelled.

Which the Russian communist implemented.....

That's what brought about the collapse,

No the system was flawed and fools were in charge. That is why it collapsed.

but as we can see today, Russia is still a viable nation which causes conniptions among the US elite over various things (such as allegedly interfering in US elections).

Yes Russia is still a power combined with the Cold War "hangover"



Well, your point here is that socialist nations fail, while capitalist nations are successful. If this is true, then the US would not be facing the problems we're facing now.

The US is not a failed state. Try again.


The comment chain started with your erroneous assertion that fascism is an offshoot of socialism, which we now both agree was incorrect.

Nope you already admitted it unwittingly as you do not know what offshoot means. Get a dictionary.

Ergo you have concede your claim the topic was about America as the first comment replied to was not about America.

Apart from that, you're using stale old McCarthyite talking points and expecting to rest on that.

Assertion.

And you're wrong: Every debate about socialism vs. capitalism occurs within the background of US politics and proposals to make the US more socialist.

Nope. Try again.

You're using examples of other countries as an attempt to argue against socialist policies in the US, but this is an irrelevant and disingenuous line of argumentation.

Nope. Try again.

Your assertion that the USSR had bread lines is an attempt to imply that, if the US adopts socialism, then the US would have bread lines, too. I don't see any basis for such a conclusion, so if you have more to offer to support your claim, I'd like to see it.

Nope. Try again.
 

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
Worker's parties are left-wing. Eugenics was a progressive ergo left-wing idea at the time. Brush up on your history



All over the place.



Sure.



Sure



New Socialists do not like Communists as the Communist propaganda failed in the 70s. All the Western Communists couldn't handle that their utopian idea failed so rebranded themselves to create separation. Ergo the phase "Real communism hasn't been tried yet!"

All right, sure, fine, uh huh, okay. :rolleyes:
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
No I rejected it.



Wrong as per both parties own rhetoric.



That is an offshoot....





Nope. You just know what offshoot means as per the above blunder. You acknowledge it was an offshoot as per "It may come from the same tree"... Look up the word and try again.





No. I pointed out a majority believing X does not make it right. That is tyranny of the majority.





Cuban, failed. USSR, collapsed. China, switched to capitalism. Eastern Bloc, collapsed. NK, open air prison and failed states. Open a history book son.





Nope you are still wrong. Try again. Less projection next time.





BS. The US provides more for welfare than Canada does as per section 8 housing. Canadians get 700-800 CDN a month.. total for shelter and food. Hence why charities feed people up here not government. No food stamps either.



Free **** HC is nothing to brag about especially when the nation has bread lines.



**** education that is free is still ****. After all all those educated communists couldn't figure out their system is a fantasy nor stop the collapse of the system. Yawn.



NK had aid from China. The US military was completely capable of destroying NK and China. The politicians didn't want to. You grasp of history is lacking.

USSR and Afghanistan *cough* Try again.

The US never fully committed to NV. Again the politicians held the military back refusing to use WW2 warfare.




You didn't look hard. The USSR had multiple famines. Figure it out.



Yes that's why the USSR exists now.... Oh wait.



Which the Russian communist implemented.....



No the system was flawed and fools were in charge. That is why it collapsed.



Yes Russia is still a power combined with the Cold War "hangover"





The US is not a failed state. Try again.




Nope you already admitted it unwittingly as you do not know what offshoot means. Get a dictionary.

Ergo you have concede your claim the topic was about America as the first comment replied to was not about America.



Assertion.



Nope. Try again.



Nope. Try again.



Nope. Try again.

So, is this string of throwaway one-liners supposed to impress me or what?

Sorry, but I just don't find you very convincing here.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Like your own? Hilarious

Well, when your entire argument consists of "Nope, try again," it doesn't really convince anyone, now does it? It's easy to engage in gainsaying, as you are doing, but to actually come up with something coherent and intelligent is clearly beyond your capabilities.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Both sides in the US did it due to the Cold War. The pledge was passed by a Democrat Congress.... The punishment was held up by a Democrat packed SCOTUS.... The only dissenting opinion was from a Republican.
The mindset of the major parties in the 1950s was quite different from today.

Also...

Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America | History & Text
In 1954, at [epublican] President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s urging, the Congress legislated that “under God” be added, making the pledge read:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.​
 
Top