Miliband - Labour didn't listen blah blah - Page 2

danielf · 06-03-2013, 15:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

Socialism in all it's forms and or degrees of implementation leads to dictatorship and the loss of freedom. History has shown this time and again. Same for fascism....

Erm ok. Where exactly does the centre-left stop and where does socialism start then.

Ramrod · 06-03-2013, 15:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Erm ok. Where exactly does the centre-left stop and where does socialism start then.

Probably at the point that the party typically finishes it's conference by singing 'keep the red flag flying'?

Will21st · 06-03-2013, 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Erm ok. Where exactly does the centre-left stop and where does socialism start then.

very good question.... which I have no answer to.

**Damien** · 06-03-2013, 15:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

Well,actually we agree then because socialists are controlling,but to differing degrees,but controlling non-the-less.
Saying that the state should provide a safety net and Healthcare to me means giving away control,e.g. if you are dependent on the state they control your life to an extent.Labour likes to control people via their welfare programs and general philosophy that government knows best,when in fact people know themselves what's best for them.

Governments are controlling. It's not unique to socialism. It's just which areas they decide to get involved in and which they don't. The right in America may want to get out of healthcare and social security but they still seem to want a lot of police and a large army. A lot also want to get involved in abortion, schools and sex education.

This isn't a right or left issue. It's a authoritarian/libertarian issue and despite what people think they're not monopolised by the right or the left. When the Government gets involved in a area you think they should keep out of then there is a temptation to deem it authoritarian. It's idiotic.

Also "people know what's best for them?", so what? It's just a meaningless soundbite. They're allowed to vote and they can vote for what they think it's best for them. A lot of people think a state that provides healthcare for all is best for them.

Quote:

Yup,they love to control!

Socialism is a rather broad definition of an even broader group of people. There are degrees and variations of socialism. It's utterly moronic to say they love to control.

I think some people on this forum need to step back a bit. I've seen this so often now it's getting tiresome. Not only are the left tree-hugging, corrupt, economic-illiterate, hypocrites that want to protect the right of terrorists now we're also a bunch of mini-Hitlers.

danielf · 06-03-2013, 16:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

<snip>

Spot on...

Ramrod · 06-03-2013, 16:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Governments are controlling. It's not unique to socialism.

But you do have to admit that socialism seems to do the 'control' thing 'better'

Quote:

This isn't a right or left issue. It's a authoritarian/libertarian issue and despite what people think they're not monopolised by the right or the left.

well the left was responsible for over 100 million deaths in the last century.....so while the left may not monopolise this, it stands head and shoulders above the right when it comes to exerting raw power over a population.

---------- Post added at 15:08 ---------- Previous post was at 15:07 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Not only are the left tree-hugging, corrupt, economic-illiterate, hypocrites that want to protect the right of terrorists now we're also a bunch of mini-Hitlers.

They so often are

**Maggy** · 06-03-2013, 16:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

I think some people on this forum need to step back a bit. I've seen this so often now it's getting tiresome. Not only are the left tree-hugging, corrupt, economic-illiterate, hypocrites that want to protect the right of terrorists now we're also a bunch of mini-Hitlers.

Agreed!

**Damien** · 06-03-2013, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

well the left was responsible for over 100 million deaths in the last century.....so while the left may not monopolise this, it stands head and shoulders above the right when it comes to exerting raw power over a population.

It's just nowhere near that simple. It's hardly something I can debunk without writing paragraph upon paragraph. I would just that being left wing doesn't correspond to being authoritarian and the problem with Nazi Germany and Communist Russia was not left wing policies but genocidal acts. I don't recall genocide being an idea embraced by the left.

Quote:

They so often are

They're really not.

Sirius · 06-03-2013, 16:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

But you do have to admit that socialism seems to do the 'control' thing 'better'

well the left was responsible for over 100 million deaths in the last century.....so while the left may not monopolise this, it stands head and shoulders above the right when it comes to exerting raw power over a population.

---------- Post added at 15:08 ---------- Previous post was at 15:07 ----------

They so often are

Spot on Sir.

Ramrod · 06-03-2013, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

It's just nowhere near that simple. It's hardly something I can debunk without writing paragraph upon paragraph.

You can't debunk it. It's a matter of historical fact. If you can stand to have your cherished beliefes shattered then read The Black Book of Communism

Quote:

I would just that being left wing doesn't correspond to being authoritarian and the problem with Nazi Germany and Communist Russia was not left wing policies but genocidal acts. I don't recall genocide being an idea embraced by the left.

Read the book.....

Will21st · 06-03-2013, 17:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Governments are controlling. It's not unique to socialism. It's just which areas they decide to get involved in and which they don't. The right in America may want to get out of healthcare and social security but they still seem to want a lot of police and a large army. A lot also want to get involved in abortion, schools and sex education.

No,it's not unique to socialism... what is unique to socialism is however the need to control it all,socially and economically. Funny how quickly people forget how controlling Labour was,and of course always has been.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

This isn't a right or left issue. It's a authoritarian/libertarian issue and despite what people think they're not monopolised by the right or the left. When the Government gets involved in a area you think they should keep out of then there is a temptation to deem it authoritarian. It's idiotic.

I don't disagree with you,however left-leaning governments are much more controlling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Also "people know what's best for them?", so what? It's just a meaningless soundbite. They're allowed to vote and they can vote for what they think it's best for them. A lot of people think a state that provides healthcare for all is best for them.

Deciding what's best for oneself in one's life is a 'meaningless sound-bite'? Now I've heard it all...

I don't need the government to dictate to me what I can or can't do or what is politically correct or not.Being able to vote doesn't mean that government shouldn't be as stripped back as necessary. Far from being a sound-bite it is to me the very essence of my understanding of government and it's relationship with the population. I know what I need,not the government. If you however like to be told what to do than that is up to you.

and yes,maybe some people do think government provided healthcare is the best.... Personally I think a system half/half is ideal,so insurance based but government regulated. Lived under such a system and it beats the NHS hands-down,but that is just my experience and opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Socialism is a rather broad definition of an even broader group of people. There are degrees and variations of socialism. It's utterly moronic to say they love to control.

No,it isn't moronic but born-out by historic facts... yes,socialism is a broad group of people but the goal of socialism is Communism,and what that leads to is well known.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

I think some people on this forum need to step back a bit. I've seen this so often now it's getting tiresome. Not only are the left tree-hugging, corrupt, economic-illiterate, hypocrites that want to protect the right of terrorists now we're also a bunch of mini-Hitlers.

I knew you would re-act in this way,I was actually going to apologise pre-emptively but didn't...

I should clarify that the goal of Socialism is ultimately Communism,or should I rather say Socialism is the slippery road that leads there,imo. That leads to atrocities and a state of terror and suffering.

But no,I'm not calling you a Mini-Hitler Damien...

danielf · 06-03-2013, 17:13

Okay, talk about weird... If the goal of socialism is communism, then why have socialism in the first place?

It seems to me that people are just playing silly semantic games here. It's perfectly possible to support the notion that those who earn more pay in a bit more (but get to keep more as well), without hankering for a world where everyone earns the same and the state controls everything. And anyone who is even going to suggest different needs to have his head examined.

Will21st · 06-03-2013, 17:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

It's just nowhere near that simple. It's hardly something I can debunk without writing paragraph upon paragraph. I would just that being left wing doesn't correspond to being authoritarian and the problem with Nazi Germany and Communist Russia was not left wing policies but genocidal acts. I don't recall genocide being an idea embraced by the left.

They're really not.

As RamRod said,you can't debunk it.... left-wing,communist governments are the most murderous of them all.

Stalin 20 million + some say it could be even more.
Mao 50 million +
Khmer Rouge 2.5 million
Kim Il-Sung 1.6 million

and there's more....

**Damien** · 06-03-2013, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will21st

No,it's not unique to socialism... what is unique to socialism is however the need to control it all,socially and economically. Funny how quickly people forget how controlling Labour was,and of course always has been.

That isn't unique to socialism. There are degrees and variations of socialism, there isn't a single form of it that is easy to define.

Also it's not hard to forget how controlling Labour were because this Government aren't much different, despite being mostly Conservative.

Quote:

Deciding what's best for oneself in one's life is a 'meaningless sound-bite'? Now I've heard it all...

I don't need the government to dictate to me what I can or can't do or what is politically correct or not.Being able to vote doesn't mean that government shouldn't be as stripped back as necessary. Far from being a sound-bite it is to me the very essence of my understanding of government and it's relationship with the population. I know what I need,not the government. If you however like to be told what to do than that is up to you.

It is a meaningless sound bite. It's up there with 'hardworking families' or other such bumper sticker slogans. It doesn't really mean anything. You don't build the roads you use, the schools you attended, the policy who protect you. Living in a society means these matters are pooled across many and the only difference is a disagreement where the state should get involved and where it should not.

Quote:

No,it isn't moronic but born-out by historic facts... yes,socialism is a broad group of people but the goal of socialism is Communism,and what that leads to is well known.

Err no.

---------- Post added at 16:26 ---------- Previous post was at 16:24 ----------

Can't think why people think this forum is increasingly alienating anyone who isn't right wing....

Will21st · 06-03-2013, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

Okay, talk about weird... If the goal of socialism is communism, then why have socialism in the first place?

Because Socialists realise that Communism can't be attained in one fell swoop and try to introduce it gradually,chipping away at capitalism and private ownership bit by bit.
Of course there are those who thought you could jump straight ahead to Communism.... the results are well known and have been mentioned already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

It seems to me that people are just playing silly semantic games here. It's perfectly possible to support the notion that those who earn more pay in a bit more (but get to keep more as well), without hankering for a world where everyone earns the same and the state controls everything. And anyone who is even going to suggest different needs to have his head examined.

In a Gulag,preferably?

just kidding,I actually agree with you.... not with the head-examining bit,though.

Of course tax needs to be levied for defence,policing,some social security,building roads and some infrastructure. Where I begin to object is this whole Bingo wheel of do-gooderism and 'giving this group more than the others because they may need it' nonsense.
By the by,I explicitly include Industry in my call for welfare reform.... the way we prop up Industries and grant them subsidies when they have enough money themselves is ridiculous.