The Struggle For A Comprehensive Socialist Movement.

Deleted - too presumptive and ponderous. How different things look when the ink dries.

Wendy, my only thought here is keyed in by the term ‘affordability’ some purist nations in Scandinavia are so prosperous , socially cohesive, that they can offer incredible social guarantees. But the US , a huge multiculturalism seems unlikely to foster specific kinds of social programs as sought for by progressives.

A social capitalist sounds a bit like an oxy moron, does it not? :sunglasses:

I don’t know yet to be honest, I am still trying to find that out in much contemplation.

Don’t be afraid to express yourself here.

Yes, there in lies the rub of multi racial multiculturalism.

You mean slave revolt did exist, which is true. Byt socialism was in fact a Marxian creation from the opium pipe.

Capitalists focus on creating and inventing things. Zerosum wants to steal things from capitalists which is all socialism is, a negative to subtract from the positive of capitalism.

A capitalist does not want even one regulation, so, therefore, one regulation makes the system socialist and now it’s merely a question of where to draw the line on how much regulation is needed.

Regulations are always for the good of society, not the capitalist.

Capitalism is zero regulation
Socialism is greater than zero, but less than 100% regulation
Fascism and communism are 100% regulated.

If someone wants to argue the definitions, then show me a regulation that benefits the capitalist who believes the free market resolves everything. If that can’t be done, then the definitions stand.

Now, do you want to eat food that is not inspected by the government? No? Then you’re a socialist. So, essentially we are all socialists arguing about just how socialist we ought to be. I doubt anyone is really a capitalist.

So all these arguments based on definitions of what party affiliations we have are basically for political rhetoric, in order to stretch out boring or displaced discussions, right?

No. A capitalist is someone who uses money to make money. A socialist is someone who wants to spend money to make society better. So you can invest and make money, and then build a shelter for the homeless.

Socialist Thinkers Before Karl Marx:

Robert Owens 1771-1858
Charles Fourier 1772- 1837
Pierre Joseph Proudhon 1809-1865
Louis Blanc 1811- 1882
Saint Simon 1760-1825

Versus

Karl Marx 1818-1883

Capitalism doesn’t steal? :laughing: :sunglasses:

Socialism doesn’t seek to disrupt or lessen innovation just so you know.

State centrally controlled capitalism does argue for a minimum of regulations, it’s only delusional libertarians that argue for a zero regulatory environment.

All socialist governments argue for 100% regulation because as socialists we understand how corruption of private individuals work like with zero oversight, I just call that common sense.

There is this tiresome narrative that socialists are against trade, investments, labor, making money, working, or running businesses. It is all of course completely unfounded.

The caricature that capitalists create for socialists is a ridiculous one.

A socialist is an individual that desires to create a levelled playing field economically in society where all people have the opportunity to succeed in life and where they’re all protected by government equally under law. This is of course much different from capitalists with their exclusive monopolies followed by a belief of exceptional entitlements where they basically don’t give a damn whatsoever about a majority of people. This is why capitalism will fail because when you throw 75% of your population under the bus into ruin it is not a winning strategy of success for society collectively as a whole.

Best chance you have at making society better is to live better yourself. If you don’t think that competition is where the cream rises to the top, then what does cause it? Think about the accumulation of wealth necessary to research cures for disease and to build shelters and to fund programs for those who can’t manage to take care of themselves. Who’s gonna accumulate that wealth? Certainly not a bunch of participation trophy hippies.

No, no noNO
this can’t be trueth!

U r RIGHT and I am WRONG

Holy hail what is going ons?

/

Turns out, Socialism is none other than philanthropic capitalism.

(some one still got to makes the money, before it is given away to the splendid poorly ones)

No, I’m pretty sure you’re confusing philanthropic capitalism with tax evasions or tax write offs.

Is this another Fixed Cross account? Ironic hearing about capitalism from the ultimate trust fund kid.

I have nothing against competition however competition taken to the extremes only hurts society as a whole. I am all about cooperative competition, at first glance that might seem contradictory but it isn’t.

I assure you there is nothing hippie about my beliefs.

Are you James S Saint now, spreading lies about my life like some resentful snake?
Ive already produced more value and done more responsible and lucrative labour than you can imagine.

As for the OP, I think barbarian horde was under the impression that you had read these authors.
Capitalism is naturally social. Tax evasion came into existence when lower class folks like yourself were given access to the mean to productions.
Socalism has failed.
“There is no such thing as a snail-king” - JP