[Discussion] Your Political Ideology

[BMN]

Just want to add. No capitalism=no progress=monkeys on a tree

intellectual advancement and progress are inherent to humans. It existed long before capitalism and will exist long after capitalism has died.

[Shinobi Train]

Just want to add. No capitalism=no progress=monkeys on a tree

Preach it! Finally, intelligence has been added to the base...maybe there is hope for humanity.

[BMN]

Preach it! Finally, intelligence has been added to the base...maybe there is hope for humanity.

your hope is misplaced...
I for one do not believe in unnecessary waste and suffering. People should have a greater purpose in their lives other than 'Make money so I don't starve'.

[Shinobi Train]

your hope is misplaced...
I for one do not believe in unnecessary waste and suffering. People should have a greater purpose in their lives other than 'Make money so I don't starve'.

You know what I'm gonna do?
I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadillac, El Dorado convertible
Hot pink with whaleskin hub caps and all leather cow interior
And big brown baby seal eyes for headlights, yeah

And I'm gonna drive around in that baby at 115 mph
Getting one mile per gallon, sucking down quarter pounder
Cheese burgers from McDonald's in the old fashioned
Non-biodegradable Styrofoam containers

And when I'm done sucking down those grease ball burgers
I'm gonna wipe my mouth with the American flag
And then I'm gonna toss the Styrofoam container right out the side
And there ain't a goddamned thing anybody can do about it

You know why? Because we got the bombs, that's why
Two words, nuclear f**king weapons, okay?
Russia, Germany, Romania
They can have all the democracy they want
They can have a big democracy cake walk

Right through the middle of Tienanmen square
And it won't make a lick of difference Because we've got the bombs, okay? John Wayne's not dead
He's frozen and as soon as we find the cure for cancer
We're gonna thaw out the duke and he's gonna be pretty pissed off

You know why? Have you ever taken a cold shower?
Well multiple that by 15 million times
That's how pissed off the Duke's gonna be..."

[BMN]

anyone actually disagree with me? (besides trolls)

[drknght]

intellectual advancement and progress are inherent to humans. It existed long before capitalism and will exist long after capitalism has died.

You're an anarchist, aren't you? Only differences contribute to progress.

[BMN]

You're an anarchist, aren't you? Only differences contribute to progress.

on the contrary, proper government and management will be key in the future. I am a proponent of strong gov't

[Zero Kelvin]

Nazism is not completely different ideology from socialism. Intervention of gov't, controlling businesses to lower unemployment, hyperinflation, 4 year plan, deutsche arbeitsfront, and other shit - That's all socialism. The background of a nazi flag is also red, concentration camps were his version of gulags. Hitler WAS a socialist.

-Nazi Führer Adolf Hitler had objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary". Upon taking over the leadership, Hitler kept the term but defined socialism as meaning a commitment of an individual to a community. Hitler claimed that true socialism does not repudiate private property unlike the claims of Marxism, and claimed that the "Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning" and said that "Communism is not socialism. Marxism is not socialism." Nazism favoured private property, freedom of contract, and promoted the creation of national solidarity that would transcend class differences. The Nazis outlawed strikes by employees and lockouts by employers, because these were regarded a threat to national unity. Instead, the state controlled and approved wage and salary levels.- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism)

This has nothing to do with Socialism o_o Just because it's called National Socialism, doesn't mean that it is Socialism.

Just want to add. No capitalism=no progress=monkeys on a tree

Implying you have any arguments to support that claim.

on the contrary, proper government and management will be key in the future. I am a proponent of strong gov't

(Y) With a proper election-system to boot.

[Wesobi]

Dear lord, people if you know nothing about politics, please, don't post here.

First of all: If you say China is a socialist country, you're wrong. Do not in any way google socialism but go read a book instead. Second of all, yes China is a "communist" country, except for one small thing. It isn't. China used to be a communist country at one point, as the USSR tried to gain allies in the cold war. Same thing why the Vietnam war actually occurred. Try to let go of your patriotic view and actually look at facts (which you don't always learn at school), then discuss it. The only problem is that nothing in China is even remotely communistic nowadays. They are easily one of the world leaders, even more so than the US or Russia. Simply look at the basic numbers. They are still a country that is in huge economical and industrial development, yet they still have one of the most steady economies in the world. I could go and explain why this is, but I suggest you read up on why this is so. Even their governing leadership system isn't remotely on par with what communism has in mind for it. There is no leadership, or at least no leadership that stands above others in communism. The proletariat rules the country, that's the fundamental idea behind it.

The biggest issue with communism is that, in theory it sounds sweet, it can't be done. Simply because of the urge of people to differentiate themselves and the fact that our opinion and society dictates upon us that we should actually have a high degree, that we should have a job and status that is seen as socially acceptable or even socially looked up to.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a socialist myself (yet again, go read about what socialism really is) but it needs to be practical. Now, I'm from Belgium myself. In itself, the system we maintain is quite socialistic. We pay a large amount of taxes to the government that they redistribute to the people. I think people in Belgium pay around, what, 50% of their money to taxes? Most people would find this insane, but all in all most people make a good living for themselves, while still benefitting from what the government has to offer us: Healthcare, one of the best educational systems in the world, a steady system and most of all a lot of social security.

I personally have to say that I never got the idea behind "The American Dream". All I see in the idea that is has is capitalistic propaganda that is outdated and doesn't relate to our time anymore. The USA was founded (or well, called itself independent) around 1770-ish somewhere, if I'm not mistaken (yes, I'm too lazy to actually google the exact date as I really don't see the relevance either on this topic). That makes it clear that "The American Dream" and reasoning behind it in itself is outdated. It was a super duper nice idea to have when you still had the industrial revolution going on, but just be honest with yourself for a second. Since the industrial revolution occurred, birth rates have sky-rocketed, globally speaking people live much longer, and there is a much higher rate of globalization as well. That in itself puts forward a NEED and REQUIREMENT for at least a basic foundation, and (in my opinion) a higher layer above that of social security as well. The basic principle behind "The American Dream" is the principle behind capitalism as well. Every man for himself, get rich or die trying (I just quoted 50 cent here, I'm so coolio right now), screw the rest, I'm the best! and what not. The problem is that this only works if you have a constant system of growth and prosperity, something which is just as impossible as communism working. Look at the crisis we have at hand now. American banks were just handing out money to everyone, people were buying stuff with a credit card all over the place. This leaves people with a constant small amount of debts each month that they have to pay off. Over time, the amounts became so big all together that it was IMPOSSIBLE to pay it off. Can you really go ahead and say that this is the system of prosperity and longevity? Sure, you could just throw in the argument that people should not buy stuff that they can't afford, or work harder for it, but let's be honest, our system doesn't allow that! Capitalism, and especially marketing and advertisement nowadays plays on the human psychology. YOU NEED AN IPHONE TO BE HIP! Let's face it, would you rather be the cool kid with the new Iphone, or would you rather be the kid that sits by the dumpster and gets food thrown at him (sorry to make this weird and perhaps rude statement, but I'm just trying to make a point here. I'm not trying to insult someone). It's pretty obvious which of the two anyone in here wants to be, but the point is that it's impossible to maintain this lifestyle, and by concluding that, capitalism is just a system that is impossible to maintain in the long run as well.

Now, don't get me wrong, and I'm sure a lot of Americans (Sorry guys, I have no quarrel with Americans, but I just like to point it out since you guys make it so easy ^_^) will hate me for saying this, considering the recent elections. I love the idea behind capitalism as much as the idea behind communism, but neither is possible because both of them are extremes. It's impossible for everyone to be equal, but it's just as impossible for everyone (despite the reason, and I think a lot of people need to stop thinking so radical about this) to make something out of themselves. So what I'm a supporter of is simply Socialistic Capitalism. I guess Obama somewhat does this, but I won't get in to that just yet. I like capitalism, but I am dead serious when I say that it's IMPOSSIBLE without any kind of restrictions put onto it by the government, or certain guidelines and what not. I don't mind companies going super big and rich, but I do mind companies having a monopoly on an entire market. It's not good for the consumer, or simply said the people. I don't mind companies making a lot of money, but I do mind those companies paying out big ass cheques to their CEO's while they fire thousands of people a the same time. I don't mind companies exponentially growing, but I do mind when it happens at the cost of something that shouldn't be so high. I hope you guys are getting where I'm coming from/at. Regulation is something that will always be needed. If not, there is always a certain group that abuses the system. This is to go in against all the people that say "hey, people abuse the system and still complain while they're lazy as hell!". Same goes for the companies, no?

Now, as for the Obama issue, I said I'd go in on it later on, but I don't feel like doing that after all, since I probably don't have enough knowledge about it, and even if I do, these kind of discussions tend to be filled with "fanboyerism"-tendencies, so I'm wisely staying off that touchy subject.

Anyways, I just wanted to throw that out there. A little bit of respect and understanding for other ways of thinking gets you a long way, and you might just be a little shocked when you reach the point where you see that your previous PoV actually wasn't all that almighty.

[drknght]

-Nazi Führer Adolf Hitler had objected to the party's previous leader's decision to use the word "Socialist" in its name as Hitler at the time instead preferred to use "Social Revolutionary". Upon taking over the leadership, Hitler kept the term but defined socialism as meaning a commitment of an individual to a community. Hitler claimed that true socialism does not repudiate private property unlike the claims of Marxism, and claimed that the "Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning" and said that "Communism is not socialism. Marxism is not socialism." Nazism favoured private property, freedom of contract, and promoted the creation of national solidarity that would transcend class differences. The Nazis outlawed strikes by employees and lockouts by employers, because these were regarded a threat to national unity. Instead, the state controlled and approved wage and salary levels.- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism)

This has nothing to do with Socialism o_o Just because it's called National Socialism, doesn't mean that it is Socialism.

After taking power, in 1933 headquarters of NSDAP decided to change the model of economy. They maintained private ownership, but it was regulated by gov't. Apparatus party-state was controlling stocks, prices, structure of production, etc. Business owners were turned into Betriebsführer, or factory leader. It is socialism/national socialism. Hitler was a socialist or even worse, fascist.

[Zero Kelvin]

After taking power, in 1933 headquarters of NSDAP decided to change the model of economy. They maintained private ownership, but it was regulated by gov't. Apparatus party-state was controlling stocks, prices, structure of production, etc. Business owners were turned into Betriebsführer, or factory leader. It is socialism/national socialism. Hitler was a socialist or even worse, fascist.

Look at Wesobi's post. Look Socialism up.

[Wesobi]

Oh, and FYI: people tend to ill-informed about the Nazis. It's derived from Hitler's political party (NSDAP, which stands for: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). Also, you seem guys forget something about this. It's a fascist political party. It's still a far right party, so in that reasoning, it has nothing to do with "socialism". It has that name because it's NATIONAL socialism. Racism, put your own before others, etc etc is their reasoning. It's similar to the KKK and what not in terms of reasoning. They just happened to like bratwurst.

[Morning Star]

Panem et Circenses as Romans used to say. Every regime is good when people's stomachs are full and when they are adequately entertained. Then every freedom has a fertile ground to grow and blossom. From poverty, hunger and sickness tyrannies are born.

[drknght]

Oh, and FYI: people tend to ill-informed about the Nazis. It's derived from Hitler's political party (NSDAP, which stands for: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). Also, you seem guys forget something about this. It's a fascist political party. It's still a far right party, so in that reasoning, it has nothing to do with "socialism". It has that name because it's NATIONAL socialism. Racism, put your own before others, etc etc is their reasoning. It's similar to the KKK and what not in terms of reasoning. They just happened to like bratwurst.

You are the one who apparently googled fascism and pasted it from wikipedia or something else. I don't know how many times it has to be explained that fascism is not an extreme right movement. It is a media's propaganda that tells people lies. Every right-wing supporter is considering fascism to be WORSE than communism. Development of fascism was the result of consequences of WW1. It was built by the people who were defeated, disappointed and desiring revenge. Communism and various crises also contributed to it. In Germany and Italy, fascist were rejection things like capitalism, liberalism, individualism. Fascism forced people to sacrifice. The people were for the government, and not the other way around.

I guess you are in a dead center of ideologies. I'm not a radical righty (I wish I could be, but I'm also human). Self-actualization is important, even if I don't like it - right is always right. Do me a favor and don't say that fascism is a right-wing movement. We support libertarian ideas and we definitely do not want fascism.

[Zero Kelvin]

You are the one who apparently googled fascism and pasted it from wikipedia or something else. I don't know how many times it has to be explained that fascism is not an extreme right movement. It is a media's propaganda that tells people lies. Every right-wing supporter is considering fascism to be WORSE than communism. Development of fascism was the result of consequences of WW1. It was built by the people who were defeated, disappointed and desiring revenge. Communism and various crises also contributed to it. In Germany and Italy, fascist were rejection things like capitalism, liberalism, individualism. Fascism forced people to sacrifice. The people were for the government, and not the other way around.

I guess you are in a dead center of ideologies. I'm not a radical righty (I wish I could be, but I'm also human). Self-actualization is important, even if I don't like it - right is always right. Do me a favor and don't say that fascism is a right-wing movement. We support libertarian ideas and we definitely do not want fascism.

In regards to the bolded part of your post, I'd just like to add that Italy was on the winning side of WW1. Fascism was founded in Italy during World War 1. And how did Communism have anything to do with Fascism? At the time of Mussolini, Lenin and his Bolsheviks were busy in Russia. The two have nothing to do with each other.

In regards to the second bolded part of your move; I have nothing to add. You're ovbiously not aware of how 'right-wing' and 'left-wing' works. Conservatism and Liberalism are both right-winged ideologies, but you can't be both. They're different.

Fascists have commonly opposed having a firm association with any section of the left-right spectrum, considering it inadequate to describe their beliefs, though fascism's goal to promote the rule of people deemed innately superior while seeking to purge society of people deemed innately inferior is identified as a prominent far-right theme. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)

[BMN]

Can anyone honesty say the way we've been doing things is acceptable? It shouldn't mattter as much what happened in the past. People should get behind what needs to be done to make sure we even have a future. Living in the moment is fina and all.. if you're an animal. We don't have to be animals anymore. Conservatism is inherently harmful because keeping things the same == stoping change == slowing down progress == people die, individually and collectively. Things need to change, people need to start considering far left-wing policies. The implications go far beyond individuals or even nations or civilization.

[GEIxBattleRifle]

You are the one who apparently googled fascism and pasted it from wikipedia or something else. I don't know how many times it has to be explained that fascism is not an extreme right movement. It is a media's propaganda that tells people lies. Every right-wing supporter is considering fascism to be WORSE than communism. Development of fascism was the result of consequences of WW1. It was built by the people who were defeated, disappointed and desiring revenge. Communism and various crises also contributed to it. In Germany and Italy, fascist were rejection things like capitalism, liberalism, individualism. Fascism forced people to sacrifice. The people were for the government, and not the other way around.

I guess you are in a dead center of ideologies. I'm not a radical righty (I wish I could be, but I'm also human). Self-actualization is important, even if I don't like it - right is always right. Do me a favor and don't say that fascism is a right-wing movement. We support libertarian ideas and we definitely do not want fascism.

Do you know what a book is? I would rather read a book about Socialism or any other political ideology from a author who is highly respected and well known for indepth analysis and has high ratings on his books compare to someone who can make a web page and ''write'' anything they want on any topic. Maybe Wesobi is smart enough to known that using too much internet will keep you narrow minded in the end and the man overall knowns wtf he's talking about. If you keep typing into google like ''Socialist China'' for example. You are pulling up websites made by random people around the world who are giving you ''their view'' on why they think China is socialist they could be right or wrong you never know

[drknght]

In regards to the bolded part of your post, I'd just like to add that Italy was on the winning side of WW1. Fascism was founded in Italy during World War 1. And how did Communism have anything to do with Fascism? At the time of Mussolini, Lenin and his Bolsheviks were busy in Russia. The two have nothing to do with each other.

In regards to the second bolded part of your move; I have nothing to add. You're ovbiously not aware of how 'right-wing' and 'left-wing' works. Conservatism and Liberalism are both right-winged ideologies, but you can't be both. They're different.

Fascists have commonly opposed having a firm association with any section of the left-right spectrum, considering it inadequate to describe their beliefs, though fascism's goal to promote the rule of people deemed innately superior while seeking to purge society of people deemed innately inferior is identified as a prominent far-right theme. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)

Communists were the worst enemies of fascists, so obviously communism had a lot to do with fascism. You said that Hitler was not a socialist, and now you tell me that I'm not aware of ideologies. Term "liberal" was stolen by socialists, I try no to identify with it now. If people are liberal, so women have freedom to abortion, then it's definitely not right-wing policy, unless in your mind. You can be both conservative and liberal. You can be conservative in one aspect and liberal in the other. Fascism is definitely more lefty. It's like slaves and their owner. Democracy is just that.

It's true that I have read many opinions about this aspect, but they are all very different, and I only preserve only specific ones that support entirely what I think.

[GEIxBattleRifle]

Can anyone honesty say the way we've been doing things is acceptable? It shouldn't mattter as much what happened in the past. People should get behind what needs to be done to make sure we even have a future. Living in the moment is fina and all.. if you're an animal. We don't have to be animals anymore. Conservatism is inherently harmful because keeping things the same == stoping change == slowing down progress == people die, individually and collectively. Things need to change, people need to start considering far left-wing policies. The implications go far beyond individuals or even nations or civilization.

I agree. Most Conservatives like to take it slow now I don't have a problem with that since I am not a big fan of them just that they can't control change. The people are changing rapidly look at the demographics for example. People are changing sooo fast the conservatives are having a hard time keeping up honestly and if they don't adapt they will slowly but surely start to die out.

Most of the policys I saw them try to preach this election were almost the SAME stuff I heard from Bush Jr years again. The talking points were almost the exact samething just reworded differently so they can fool people who don't pay attention at all

[Yerrina]

This is going to be so long no one may bother to read, but Never, ever in my short miserable life have I ever been so suicidal because of such an amount of Ignorance. Zero and Wesobi and a few others, thank you.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____

Now, from a former student of Economics, and a frequent attender of the Students' Social Worker party meetings or something, AND JUST A PERSON WHO ACTUALLY READS BOOKS I tend to agree with what Wesobi is suggesting so far. Communism is indeed flawless in theory, and there are major problems in its implementation but

BUT

BUT Communism my dear friends, as in the ****ing Communist Manifesto of Marx, as well as the writings of Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky, have never, ever mentioned or indicated or called for MANY of the 'communist features' and 'policies' decorating the history of USSR and China and North Korea and Cuba and wherever . . . .

They are Capitalist economies, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD Communist basis, as Zero outlined. If you let private sector and companies exist, YOU ARE OPERATING IN A FREE MARKET CAPITALIST SYSTEM, end of story.

I tend to be of Wesobi's school of thought or direction. I haven't made up my mind on Socialism yet, but the way it seems to me so far, nationalization of crucial industries (defense, education and health for example) and the banking system is a requirement in my vision of the model country, with allowing some heavily regulated private-sector to exist.

Having outlined that, some replies to previous commentators.

A wider explanation of my ideal policy would be one that tries to destroy classism in the economy/society. One that straves for actual freedom from labor in the future. So people won't have to waste their lives on forced payed slavery. And I'm aware that won't go easy with all the established corruption in our world. I'd follow a guy/lady that tries to deminish the labor pressure on the people. I don't want to waste 5 days of my week forcing myself to do work that I don't like, making me passive since I can't do anything about it. And I wouldn't wish that for my fellow men either. I'm sorry, I can't think within the borders society since it bores me. And that simple-minded way of looking at politics won't change the future for our kids.

What you speak of, my boy, are Marxists ideas, or echoes of them :
1. labour-wage slavery.
2.alienation theory
3. expolitation of the worker and the class struggle

Capitalism is the only known form of government to actually work, all the others fail miserably and the citizens live in poverty. I can explain why, but I shouldn't have to, it's simple math. I'm a capitalist.

Someone hasn't been to the third world countries and has NOT seen how Africa has been made a raw-material-supply store for Capitalism to allocate the so-called rare resources. I study this in a module called the Politics of Development and Africa. It's basically why is Africa a mess, and how is the West and capitalism are the reason why . Adam Smith is rotting in his grave. So is Keyens. Do you know who they are ?

Capitalism is, as Marxists argue, the reason for the current economic crisis.

I personally have not made up my mind about that just yet because I am confused to what extent is Neoliberalism considered a feature or an element of Capitalism. Capitalists will argue it's not, it's just deregulation that lead into the crisis.

HOWEVER the dead Bearded Mr. Marx SAID that Capitalism will come in new faces, and that there will always be justifications to why it screwed up. BECAUSE DEREGULATION HAPPENED DUE OF THE PROFIT MOTIVE AS DEAD MARX PREACHED ! Why would ****ING Greenspan make it ILLEGAL to regulate banks if HE DIDNT GET SOME SORT OF BENEFIT FROM IT !

The "crack" in 2008, you mean the so called "finance crisis"?
It wasn't the main fault of the USA and especially NOT the fault of capitalism lol! That's actually the main belief of everyone who did not watch the news or a political discussion since 2009.

W/e back to the main topic!
The most easy way to check if your system will be economically able to stay alive is to ask one single question:
Does the demand and supply for good and money have a free (free= depending on market) but influencable will?
.

You people seriously need to familiarize yourself with such terms/ideas as Laissez-faire Economy that Adam Smith preached about, and Keyensian approach to Free market. They are both capitalists but different. You now speak of Laissez faire economics, letting the Invisible hand of the economy regulate it, as Adam Smith argued in the Wealth of Nations.

Well, Keyens basically says "LOL, to hell with that". Government needs to intervene and regulate, we can't wait for the unemployment to fix itself, we can't wait for divine revelation to descend upon the economy, and that's what every single ****ing country in the world is doing. All countries intervene in the mechanism of their economy. Demand and Supply NEVER were the only influence.

For those interested ~

Even though I don't agree with him entirely, I will conclude with the brilliant analogy and words of Alain Badiou, in the beginning of "L'Hypothèse Communiste"(2010:3)

"Lumping together Stalin and Hitler was already a sign of extreme intellectual poverty: The norm by which any collective undertaking has to be judge is the number of deaths and its causes, it was argued.

If that was the case, the huge colonial genocides and massacres, the millions of deaths in the civil and world wars throughout which the West forged its might, should be enough to discredit, even in the eyes of 'philosophers' who extol their morality, the parliamentary regimes of Europe and America"

[GEIxBattleRifle]

^

I read your comment. I don't mind reading that's how you learn because here in the US where I live if you ain't into capitalism you are some how viewed as a communist. Ignorance runs high here it's unbelievable

[BMN]

thank you Yerrina for speaking some wisdom here. It seems to be lacking among other members...

[★-Star-]

I believe that everyone should be encouraged and allowed to work for things in life. I believe that people who work hard shouldn't have to be forced to help people who don't work at all.

-People should be allowed to achieve greatness. They should not tied down by the weights of others who are just along to feed off of ones success.

I believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[Swizzik]

I'm a moderate liberal. I have conservative and liberal values but mostly liberal values. I see flaws in both sides of the political spectrum and what is good about both as well.

[Sanguis]

I support the one where you put a tag on about 10 different chimps, each reading a different approach to a problem and make them all fight to the death and the winner... well you get the rest.

Sadly though this would never work, we just don't have enough chimps