Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

The whole messing with the judicial system (though to be fair, that’s not limited to one side or the other) and the high amount of nationalism in the political sense, and general authoritarian bent?

 

Edit: and you link to a thread by the resident Polish far-right/rightwing/conservative forumite?

Edited by smjjames
Posted (edited)

The whole messing with the judicial system (though to be fair, that’s not limited to one side or the other) and the high amount of nationalism in the political sense, and general authoritarian bent?

 

Sorry, I fixed the link in the post. It was... a joke. :)

 

 

The whole messing with the judicial system (though to be fair, that’s not limited to one side or the other) and the high amount of nationalism in the political sense, and general authoritarian bent?

 

Edit: and you link to a thread by the resident Polish far-right/rightwing/conservative forumite?

 

I wanted to link to a specific post where he said the current Polish government is run by socialist christians. I could have just stated the joke outright but then he'd be back here demanding to know exactly where he stated that, or claim I misinterpreted his meaning while quoting verbatim.

Edited by majestic

No mind to think. No will to break. No voice to cry suffering.

Posted

 

The whole messing with the judicial system (though to be fair, that’s not limited to one side or the other) and the high amount of nationalism in the political sense, and general authoritarian bent?

 

 

Sorry, I fixed the link in the post. It was... a joke. :)

I’m American, so, the fine details of Polish politics are limited, so, I missed the joke you were trying to make.

Posted

 

 

The whole messing with the judicial system (though to be fair, that’s not limited to one side or the other) and the high amount of nationalism in the political sense, and general authoritarian bent?

 

Sorry, I fixed the link in the post. It was... a joke. :)

I’m American, so, the fine details of Polish politics are limited, so, I missed the joke you were trying to make.

 

The entire world thinks Poland has a right wing populist government with a nationalistic, conservative and religious bent, except for Sharp_One. For him his government is run by socialist christians.

No mind to think. No will to break. No voice to cry suffering.

Posted

everyone who is not hardcore communist is far right, don't you know? Well people still thinks that National Socialists are right wing so who can tell huh? :/

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Posted

everyone who is not hardcore communist is far right, don't you know? Well people still thinks that National Socialists are right wing so who can tell huh? :/

 

Yeah, and people actually think the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is actually a dictatorship. How can it be, having democratic and republic in the name? :w00t:

  • Like 2

No mind to think. No will to break. No voice to cry suffering.

Posted

 

everyone who is not hardcore communist is far right, don't you know? Well people still thinks that National Socialists are right wing so who can tell huh? :/

 

Yeah, and people actually think the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is actually a dictatorship. How can it be, having democratic and republic in the name? 

 

 

''People's'' is the key word in it :w00t:

 

Do you disagree that Nazi's were socialistic or that they were nationalistic???

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Posted (edited)

very short and dumbed down answear could be something like that:

 

socialism - state ownership of means of production

nationalism - putting forward national interest above global

Edited by Chilloutman

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Posted (edited)

How much of the means of production have to be state owned and to what degree have national interest to be put first? As it stands, I can’t really think of any country that is NOT “national” and “socialist” to some degree, by those definitions

 

Of course that is true, not sure about USA, I don't think there is many state controled companies. Nazis just put that nationalism to another whole level, they didn't put national interest above global in their own country, they also thought that every other nation is inferior and have to be "corrected', that is why they put shame on that word. Today healthy nationalism have to be called patriotism otherwise you get associated with nazis in seconds. But its a word play really

Edited by Chilloutman

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Posted

Entire world thought that Hillary would be president, except for Sharp_one. Who was right about that? ;)

 

 

Actually Val was the one here that not only believed Trump would win, but was willing to wager on it. So he gets more credit than you.

Posted

Socialism vs socialism, people these days are talking about two different things.

 

Free economies rely on not over-consuming (or should), which is hard when people will consume based on loans. Essentially a populace will consume through it's surplus and abundance, until another group with the credit is owed the chance to consume their fair share. Which means people now must work to make up for their over-consumption.

 

There are two current problems. We want society to be fair so we want to maintain the value of a currency, and thereby maintain the validity of credit. This means not clearing debts, although sometimes simplifying the debt equation. However the people who need to produce will not be able to do it effectively if they can't engage in trade, yet they have little credit and are unworthy of being given more. In these circumstances you have to inflate the currency, but then you mess up loans between currencies. So then finally you must tax the rich to redistribute wealth, that way the working class can be productive enough to pay back the working class. Essentially the rich must invest in those who are trying to productively pay back their debts to the rich. Not doing so is the first problem. The second problem is the cyclic nature of the economy in which middle America consumes on a wide scale the America dream, then in the next half of the cycle a very few get to consume at a decadent level. In many ways it seems better if we just had two middle classes, which kind of existed between two different generations, but the way our populations are skewing this is starting to collapse.

 

So if, wealth redistribution is "socialism," then sure, all modern nations are socialist. But traditional socialism was more than just wealth redistribution even though most today mean it to be wealth redistribution or universal income. The thing is, permanent fixed systems of redistribution aren't fantastic and are quite stifling to growth. We want to more strategically direct our surplus to building out society on the large scale. Whether through government spending, or through large public sector spending. However to suggest this gets you labeled as establishment democrat or neo-liberal, which are far worse. If anything it's New Keynesian, which will be sympathetic to the politics of Bernie Sanders. There is a good reason why Sander's New Deal style democratic socialism / social democracy (depending on who you ask) is taking off, but I believe mostly it just sounds good to people's ears. The real reason is because our nation is moving towards economic default relative to other countries. Currently we are staving things off by letting our middle class collapse. Germany and China save more than they consume (per capita.) unlike the US where most people live paycheck to paycheck and can't save much. Truly saving for many means cutting enough spend to where you're basically living impoverished lives. Minimalism as a style is truly for the rich. Further, social momentum typically means spending enough to maintain your social capital. This is especially true when it comes to spending on the youth.

 

Basically the state of affairs is that the Boomer's where given bad credit, making them feel right in their successes, where their children must rely on taking out loans themselves to get started in life. Which means that the over-consumption of the past now must be paid back by the new generation in order to maintain the value of the dollar. There really is no way out. Right now western's aren't really allowed to invest in China, but China is buying up a ton of western companies and moving their tech and IP portfolios. There is a real reason why Sander's and Trump sync up on the grounds of China. China is a great trade partner, we want to specialize in different sectors and trade. The problem is the US is ahead of the world and China wants to catch up, and will negotiate deals that in the short are great for the west but in the long term are bad. The US has mostly invested itself in the software and services side of things over the past 30 years, and these market's are getting tapped out. Which is why Amazon is really the only name of the game when it comes to the US clawing it's way back out of stagnation. Unfortunately Amazon relies heavily on the consumption of American's and the integration of the global supply chain connecting us to China. So trade deals must be negotiated, because globalism is not going to be turned back.

 

I've kind of gone off track about socialism, but my point is. We don't want classical socialism, and what people think is socialism is not. Wealth redistribution is an economic tool it's not a stable system. No more so than unregulated pure capitalism. There is a reason having the worker's control the means of production leads to balkanizing syndicates, and why it's much better to have publicly traded companies so people can buy into any system. As always people need wealth to even start that, so that is where *some* wealth redistribution comes in. It's also where *prudent* lending comes in. We also need to stop giving bad loans, but doing so is the easiest way to become super rich. Yet people still wanted to vote for Clinton...

Posted

 

 

How much of the means of production have to be state owned and to what degree have national interest to be put first? As it stands, I can’t really think of any country that is NOT “national” and “socialist” to some degree, by those definitions

Of course that is true, not sure about USA, I don't think there is many state controled companies. Nazis just put that nationalism to another whole level, they didn't put national interest above global in their own country, they also thought that every other nation is inferior and have to be "corrected', that is why they put shame on that word. Today healthy nationalism have to be called patriotism otherwise you get associated with nazis in seconds. But its a word play really
perhaps so. But if (close to) every nation can be called socialist, then the word does loose its usefulness a bit, doesn’t it? Same with nationalist, for that matter.

 

And I might perhaps add something: I believe the Nazis were more focused on race than nationality in the stricter sense.

 

 

Important part is 'to some degree'. I am ok with some socialistic policies but I don't want socialistic state. Its about balance and prefer more free market than socialistic engineering.

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Posted (edited)

 

 

everyone who is not hardcore communist is far right, don't you know? Well people still thinks that National Socialists are right wing so who can tell huh? :/

 

Yeah, and people actually think the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is actually a dictatorship. How can it be, having democratic and republic in the name? 

 

 

''People's'' is the key word in it :w00t:

 

Do you disagree that Nazi's were socialistic or that they were nationalistic???

 

They weren't socialsts, no. Hitler violently purged what little his party had that could be considered socialist (Night of the Long Knives) and proceeded to set up a system of extreme right wing ideas combined with an economic "third option" that was neither socialist nor capitalist, not much surprising considering that the Nazis viewed both as the enemy.

 

Business and state formed a symbiotic relationship in Nazi Germany, not one where the state owned everything (communist) or the state keeps out of it as much as possible (capitalism). It wasn't that different from what currently both right wing and left wing populists like to criticize about the current political climate - that big business can do as it pleases and buys favor with the governments. The Germans at the time were supposed to just take it.

 

What makes Nazism and far-left extremism appear similar is the societal collectivism that formed the basis of the organisation of the state.

Edited by majestic
  • Like 1

No mind to think. No will to break. No voice to cry suffering.

Posted (edited)

In National Socialism economy is just tool to achive state's goals. Which is quite different from socialism and capitalism which both focus on people having the wealth, disagreeing mainly on how wealth is distributed and who owns means of production. In national socialism people didn't matter only state, which is why their views of economy is quite difficult to place on traditional left-right wing axis especially in today's political discussion. It is their strong views of nation, superority of native folk, social politics, etc. which is reason why they are placed in far-right on traditional left-right spectrum.

 

The term "National Socialism" arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of "socialism", as an alternative to both international socialism and free market capitalism. Nazism rejected the Marxist concept of class conflict, opposed cosmopolitan internationalism and sought to convince all parts of the new German society to subordinate their personal interests to the "common good", accepting political interests as the main priority of economic organization -"European Business, Dictatorship, and Political Risk, 1920-1945"

Edited by Elerond
  • Like 2
Posted

Latest outrage is Samantha Bee calling Ivanka a "feckless c***" .  I guess I hang out with too many Aussies and Scots as that word almost seems like puncutation to me :lol:

  • Like 2

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Posted

people on both sides get TRIGGERED too easy over bad words and they only care if someone on 'their side' is the target.

  • Like 1

DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Posted

Samantha Bee, Roseann Barr, the NFL, the NFL players, Trump, Disney, CNN, Fox News, yadda, yadda, yadda.

 

Want to make it all go away? You can:

 

n3FUQWy.jpg

  • Like 3

"While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before"

Thomas Sowell

Posted (edited)

 

100% support this, hijabs are totes fine. Not sure if Denmark has antifa hooligans but I would expect society to treat that the same.

Should Groucho Marx glasses be outlawed too?

 

Yes! Just as shark costumes, as it was done in Austria! And don't even think about putting a scarf around your neck when it's not really cold!

Edited by Fluffle
  • Like 1

"Loyal Servant of His Most Fluffyness, Lord Kerfluffleupogus, Devourer of the Faithful!"

 

ringoffireresistance.gif *wearing the Ring of Fire Resistance* (gift from JFSOCC)

Posted

Samantha Bee, Roseann Barr, the NFL, the NFL players, Trump, Disney, CNN, Fox News, yadda, yadda, yadda.

 

Want to make it all go away? You can:

 

n3FUQWy.jpg

Was expecting

 

200w.gif

  • Like 1

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...