3 ms·

"Why is socialism such a boogieman in the USA?" Because every single time it's been enacted in the past 100 years, it's resulted in the deaths of millions of i

"Why is socialism such a boogieman in the USA?" Because every single time it's been enacted in the past 100 years, it's resulted in the deaths of millions of its own citizenry. Because the very basis of the american legal system and the american legacy (not to mention english common law) is based on individual over collective rights. Socialism is, quite simply, unamerican, by definition.

nightcracker 11y ago
You're going to have to back up those bold claims for them to hold any value. Also, please do not confuse 'unamerican' for 'bad', and 'american' for 'good'. In fact, I'd argue that the american economic and social system is broken (and thus an 'american' social system does mean a 'bad' system). Your 1% is depriving the 99% of most value.
- PopeOfNope 11y ago
  please do not confuse 'unamerican' for 'bad', and 'american' for 'good' That's your own projection, not mine. I clearly stated in my comment that socialism was unamerican because it goes against the founding principles of the country. I don't deny the current system is broken. It has been for a long, long time. But, if you think socialism is the solution, you haven't been paying attention to history. Socialism always results in tyranny. It did in Russia. It did in China. Vietnam. Korea. Even the Nordic countries, who had the best chance of pulling it off, have started to suffer under its weight.
  - dghf 11y ago
    > Socialism always results in tyranny. Anarchist Catalonia? (Admittedly, it didn't last long, thanks chiefly to a different bunch of socialists, who were in turn defeated by fascists.)
    - PopeOfNope 11y ago
      I remember reading that a particular author, Franz Borkenau, was highly critical of the communists in Anarchist Catalonia, describing the terror they inflicted on Barcelona in his book the spanish cockpit. Interestingly enough, he was also one of the pioneers of the totalitarianism theory. He argued that Vladimir Lenin created the first totalitarian dictatorship and that nearly all communist and fascist states were totalitarian in nature.
      - dghf 11y ago
        > I remember reading that a particular author, Franz Borkenau, was highly critical of the communists in Anarchist Catalonia, describing the terror they inflicted on Barcelona in his book the spanish cockpit. Are you referring to the Stalinist oppression that began with the Barcelona May Days in 1937, or to anarchist atrocities in the city before then?
        PopeOfNope 11y ago
        The description of the book I'm reading doesn't specify, but from what I understand, Borkenau spent a few months there in '36 and in '37, so he could have written about both. The book just made it to the top of my to read pile. :)
  - nightcracker 11y ago
    > Socialism always results in tyranny. ?! Firstly, the countries you listed identified themselves with communism, not socialism. Secondly, they never implemented actual communism - there was still an upper class and immense amounts of corruption. Lastly and more importantly, those systems were put in place by the tyrants, not the other way around.
    - PopeOfNope 11y ago
      Ah, the no true scotsman fallacy. I hear that one a lot. It's an oldie, but a goodie. Communism is a subset of socialism; the share they same root philosophy. They never actually implemented true communism because it's not possible. Humans will always create a hierarchy. Where no official hierarchy exists, they will create unofficial ones.
      - unprepare 11y ago
        Let me get this straight: >Communism is a subset of socialism and > Socialism always results in tyranny. but your only examples of tyranny are from communist regimes. Does that mean that: > Square is a subset of rectangle so >rectangle always results in four right angles given that my only examples of rectangles are squares? Saying socialism /always/ does anything, and then listing only examples from a specific subset of socialism is plainly incorrect. By your own admission: >Humans will always create a hierarchy Socialism could not have been tested, because it would require social ownership of the production of goods, and co-operative management of those resources. Hierarchy means they did not have co-operative management of resources, they had hierarchical management of resources.
        PopeOfNope 11y ago
        Your attempt at applying mathematical logic to human affairs, as if one had anything to do with the other, is laughable.
        wfo 11y ago
        The poster you're responding to is trying to show you that your "argument" is nonsensical mindless garbage and has no basis in rational thought. And being very polite about it to boot.
dispossess 11y ago
I'd argue that a primary misfeature of the US system, crony capitalism, is actually the result of socialism. Crony capitalism only works if you have enough government spending and control to make that sort of corruption profitable.
- PopeOfNope 11y ago
  Excellent point.

nightcracker 11y ago

You're going to have to back up those bold claims for them to hold any value. Also, please do not confuse 'unamerican' for 'bad', and 'american' for 'good'. In fact, I'd argue that the american economic and social system is broken (and thus an 'american' social system does mean a 'bad' system). Your 1% is depriving the 99% of most value.

PopeOfNope 11y ago
please do not confuse 'unamerican' for 'bad', and 'american' for 'good' That's your own projection, not mine. I clearly stated in my comment that socialism was unamerican because it goes against the founding principles of the country. I don't deny the current system is broken. It has been for a long, long time. But, if you think socialism is the solution, you haven't been paying attention to history. Socialism always results in tyranny. It did in Russia. It did in China. Vietnam. Korea. Even the Nordic countries, who had the best chance of pulling it off, have started to suffer under its weight.
- dghf 11y ago
  > Socialism always results in tyranny. Anarchist Catalonia? (Admittedly, it didn't last long, thanks chiefly to a different bunch of socialists, who were in turn defeated by fascists.)
  - PopeOfNope 11y ago
    I remember reading that a particular author, Franz Borkenau, was highly critical of the communists in Anarchist Catalonia, describing the terror they inflicted on Barcelona in his book the spanish cockpit. Interestingly enough, he was also one of the pioneers of the totalitarianism theory. He argued that Vladimir Lenin created the first totalitarian dictatorship and that nearly all communist and fascist states were totalitarian in nature.
    - dghf 11y ago
      > I remember reading that a particular author, Franz Borkenau, was highly critical of the communists in Anarchist Catalonia, describing the terror they inflicted on Barcelona in his book the spanish cockpit. Are you referring to the Stalinist oppression that began with the Barcelona May Days in 1937, or to anarchist atrocities in the city before then?
      - PopeOfNope 11y ago
        The description of the book I'm reading doesn't specify, but from what I understand, Borkenau spent a few months there in '36 and in '37, so he could have written about both. The book just made it to the top of my to read pile. :)
- nightcracker 11y ago
  > Socialism always results in tyranny. ?! Firstly, the countries you listed identified themselves with communism, not socialism. Secondly, they never implemented actual communism - there was still an upper class and immense amounts of corruption. Lastly and more importantly, those systems were put in place by the tyrants, not the other way around.
  - PopeOfNope 11y ago
    Ah, the no true scotsman fallacy. I hear that one a lot. It's an oldie, but a goodie. Communism is a subset of socialism; the share they same root philosophy. They never actually implemented true communism because it's not possible. Humans will always create a hierarchy. Where no official hierarchy exists, they will create unofficial ones.
    - unprepare 11y ago
      Let me get this straight: >Communism is a subset of socialism and > Socialism always results in tyranny. but your only examples of tyranny are from communist regimes. Does that mean that: > Square is a subset of rectangle so >rectangle always results in four right angles given that my only examples of rectangles are squares? Saying socialism /always/ does anything, and then listing only examples from a specific subset of socialism is plainly incorrect. By your own admission: >Humans will always create a hierarchy Socialism could not have been tested, because it would require social ownership of the production of goods, and co-operative management of those resources. Hierarchy means they did not have co-operative management of resources, they had hierarchical management of resources.
      - PopeOfNope 11y ago
        Your attempt at applying mathematical logic to human affairs, as if one had anything to do with the other, is laughable.
        wfo 11y ago
        The poster you're responding to is trying to show you that your "argument" is nonsensical mindless garbage and has no basis in rational thought. And being very polite about it to boot.

dispossess 11y ago

I'd argue that a primary misfeature of the US system, crony capitalism, is actually the result of socialism. Crony capitalism only works if you have enough government spending and control to make that sort of corruption profitable.

PopeOfNope 11y ago
Excellent point.