Political Theory

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

BrianAnderson — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:20:17 GMT

I mean there might be minor differences but I dont see any big difference in reality.

Having to choose between getting punched in the face by Shaq dressed up as a clown or Shaq dressed up as a mime isn't really a choice at all. You're still getting blasted in the face with 300 pounds of muscle. That's the difference.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

hugolp — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:06:06 GMT

Felipe- fascist countries and socialist/commumnist countries use very different tactics. All I was saying was that while they may be two sides of the same coin- with state power, the nature in which these states operate are inherently different. Socialist countries try to do most things via public spending. They don't like the market, and, the state may have a monopoly on certain services. Fascism requires the state and private business works together- that the state dictates private business, and, employs everyone, and has a heavy emphasis on the military. I see how they're two sides of the same coin looking at it from the libertarian perspective- all I was saying was that I don't think you should say that they're the same- because they're really not. I've been reading about Soviet Russia lately, and, I can attest that the principles driving the USSR were very different from the ones driving Italy, or Germany. That's why I was trying to make an important distinction between fascism and socialism/communism.

I think it was Goebbels who publish in a newspaper that communism and national-socialism where similar ideologies or shared the same goals or something like that (I am lazy to look up the reference right now).

But ignoring Goebbles opinion, I do think marxist propaganda and national-socialist propaganda are very different. But are the system really that different?

You mention the military in fascist states... well, the military was key in communist countries too.

You mention the use of the market in fascist states, but if you dont really own your company, because government can mandate whatever, is it really that different from a burocrat that runs the company? I mean there might be minor differences but I dont see any big difference in reality. The propaganda I know its very different.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

SilentXtarian — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 06:45:23 GMT

Felipe- fascist countries and socialist/commumnist countries use very different tactics. All I was saying was that while they may be two sides of the same coin- with state power, the nature in which these states operate are inherently different. Socialist countries try to do most things via public spending. They don't like the market, and, the state may have a monopoly on certain services. Fascism requires the state and private business works together- that the state dictates private business, and, employs everyone, and has a heavy emphasis on the military. I see how they're two sides of the same coin looking at it from the libertarian perspective- all I was saying was that I don't think you should say that they're the same- because they're really not. I've been reading about Soviet Russia lately, and, I can attest that the principles driving the USSR were very different from the ones driving Italy, or Germany. That's why I was trying to make an important distinction between fascism and socialism/communism.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

Felipe — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:59:23 GMT

So to sum it up- we're not a socialist state- we're more a fascist state, or a corporatist state. And please don't tell me that fascism and socialism are both two sides of the same coin- open a history book, please.

I thought this topic was crystal clear to every libertarian.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

BrianAnderson — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:37:24 GMT

Fascism/Socialism are really just different ways to dress up and justify Interventionism.

People don't think that the United States will ever knowingly adopt socialist policies, and they're right. Now that the government is bribing citizens with their own money, it's easy to trick people into thinking they're doing some kind of good for society.

As Norman Thomas said, "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

Mises Pieces — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:38:44 GMT

Interventionism is Interventionism no matter what you call it IMO.

You either allow people to associate freely, or you restrict them from doing so. Fascism/Socialism are really just different ways to dress up and justify Interventionism.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

hugolp — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:51:53 GMT

So to sum it up- we're not a socialist state- we're more a fascist state, or a corporatist state. And please don't tell me that fascism and socialism are both two sides of the same coin- open a history book, please.

Is it? If we leave the political propaganda aside, what are the main economical differences between a fascist state and a socialist dictatorship, or even between a right-wing social democracy and a socialist democracy?

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

liberty student — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 07:55:20 GMT

SilentXtarian:
Rather, I would say that we are more close to fascism than we ever have been to socialism

Yup.

SilentXtarian:
we have a runaway government

There are no stay at home governments. Not for very long.

SilentXtarian:
So to sum it up- we're not a socialist state- we're more a fascist state, or a corporatist state. And please don't tell me that fascism and socialism are both two sides of the same coin- open a history book, please.

They are two sides of the same coin. The state coin. Throw it away. Use honest market based money.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

BrianAnderson — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 06:07:05 GMT

Okay, I think a lot of our disagreement is in regards to the definition of certain terms. My opinion of that we're already in a highly 'crony capitalistic' economy, and I feel that the next step is socialism under some kind of veil of crony capitalism. I would put the bailouts and federally-funded projects under crony capitalism that might make people believe socialism is good for everyone. I guess when you say that socialism makes you think of the Soviet Union, it makes me think of the government decided what is or isn't "too big to fail". When I imagine the Soviet Union, I picture communism not socialism.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

SilentXtarian — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 05:56:14 GMT

Brian Anderson- we would be more on the road towards crony capitalism than towards socialism. Socialism implies that the government is inherently working towards the people. Crony capitalism is a system where the government bails companies out whenever there's a problem and heavily regulates them. This has been explained here (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Under-Obama_-crony-capitalism-again-rules-the-day-84271222.html) and probably in many other articles. As for your claim about people supporting universal health care- that's not what the health care reform bill. As for the health care reform bill- it is not socialism. It heavily regulates the health care industry- but it is not socialism- you can go to the government's website itself to see what it really does (http://healthreform.gov/newsroom/new_patients_bill_of_rights.html). It certainly is a product of a mixed economy (the negative effects of it). And I'm sorry if I came across as rude- but I don't like it when someone says we're on the road to socialism, because when I hear someone say we're on the road to socialism I imagine the Soviet Union, if anything I think it would be more correct to say that we're on the road to crony capitalism... this is nowhere near close to the level of socialism. I think that a lot of people in the USA believe in capitalism... but they just believe it should be heavily regulated- and this is what happens because of it.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

BrianAnderson — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 05:44:41 GMT

Unfortunately, I didn't say we were close to socialism.

First, being "on the road" to socialism is a whole lot different than what you're making it sound like I said. We have a president who likes the idea of socialism, which is why I described us as being "on the road" to it during this presidency.

Second, I already understand everything that, for some reason, you typed out regarding corporations and government. While I know that these things are happening, a lot of the public does not, yet many of them support the idea of universal healthcare and such without fully grasping the negative impacts of socialism on a society.

There's no need to be rude and tell me to "open up a history book". This is a friendly place to talk about different subjects. No one appreciates a bad attitude.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

SilentXtarian — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 05:35:01 GMT

Brian Anderson- I think that to call our nation close to socialism is an insult to socialist nations. At least socialist nations have a responsible nation. What we have is a government that has completely ignored their enumerated powers, and, we have a runaway government that doesn't care about rules, or restrictions, or rights (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/92245/the_federal_government_is_ignoring.html?cat=37)... article 1 section 8 lists the rights congress has, but now the executive branch has usurped most of those powers in the name of monetary policy and combating recessions. We have fake socialism right now. Socialism is when governments control business. It is true that the economic recovery act was somewhat socialist itself in that it nationalized businesses- at least temporary.

Rather, I would say that we are more close to fascism than we ever have been to socialism- and for reasons I've mentioned above, that we have a runaway government, and our government pursues faith based policies in violation of the 1st amendment, and, it always tries to play off nationalism and hyper nationalism, and, it allows corporate lobbyists to own the government. Most of the bills are written not to control businesses- but so businesses control how government affects them. Corporations want to control how the government affects them so most of the regulations in place won't be harmful to them- in fact, they would be more beneficial to them. There are genuine cases where a bill may hurt an industry- but it is offset as with the health care reform act, by a mandate requiring all American citizens to get health care.

So to sum it up- we're not a socialist state- we're more a fascist state, or a corporatist state. And please don't tell me that fascism and socialism are both two sides of the same coin- open a history book, please.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

BrianAnderson — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 05:24:01 GMT

I think the first post is a little confused between 'liberals' and 'libertarians', first off.

but I really hate how people say we're on the road to socialism.

I do think we're on the road towards socialism, but I don't think we'll ever get there. I mean, people criticizing Obama for being a socialist is a credible argument. He does believe in socialism. That's just how his dumb mind works. But our economy was so much worse when FDR was the president. Wasn't the top tax bracket at nearly 90% or somewhere around there? I think that's the closest we'll ever get to socialism now that we have the internet and everything to keep people much more informed.

Does anyone have a graph or table of the income tax rates under each U.S. President?

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

SilentXtarian — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 04:48:31 GMT

I may be in the minority here... but I really hate how people say we're on the road to socialism. What our problem is- is not socialism itself per se. The problem we are dealing with lies with our mixed economy. It's the idea that there exists a middle ground with heavy regulation and a capitalist economy. The government still allows capitalism to a point. But I just thought I'd voice my opinion- because I'm starting to not like the use of the word socialism, because socialism relates to communism, and, I don't think we should calling our political enemies socialists just because we don't like their political ideas. We should rather call out their ideas for what they really are.

Re: Why must anti U.S. be pro socialism

Bogart — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:42:52 GMT

First you defnition of Libertarian is off. True libertarians believe that the most moral and productive relationships between individuals are when the individuals consent to the relationship, and that it is immoral and unproductive for one individual or group of individuals to use force, the threat of force, theft or fraud in realtionships with other individuals. It is also moral for individuals to defend themselves when faced with force, threats of force, theft or fraud. Government whose only source of funds is through taxation, debt (Deferred taxation) or inflation (Fraud through the destruction of the value of others property), in other words THEFT, can not be moral nor can it be productive.

As for the main question:

The people who label themselves as Conservative (I call them Soft National Socialists, Fascists) put the term Socialist on their political opponents who in many cases do want to socialize industry/ies but want less foreign presence. Many Libertarians who are worlds away from Socialists allign themselves with the political enemies of the Conservatives on issues of using govenrment force on other people. So the Conservatives use the lable Socialist to describe Libertarians because the Conservatives are afraid that the Libertarians might begin to convert Conservatives to their way of thinking.