I don't know what your point is and if it is fact based. I got the impression that there where alot of killing and junkies and other stuff, I get the feeling that your throwing a bunch of negatives without any reference to actual facts. Also, I hope your not generalising the term socialist to include other ideologies. Most of what I understood of what you said would apply to communists in former Warsaw pact, DPRK and China. Though China has takes some steps away from othodox communism today. I don't mean to be mean, I only don't understand your post and would, if you care, to get a better explanation(atleast I wan't one, don't know about others). I'm trying my self to type as good as English I can, to decrease the chance of getting miss understood.tkobo wrote:Its only that way in the US because the socialists havent completed their soft sell job yet.It could easily end up just like other parts of the world,were violence is the socialists way to steal for themselves what their governments didnt for them.And of course their governments way to steal to begin with,setting the example.
If they ever manage to convince enough of the population here in the US that sitting back and taking from others is better then producing,the killing fields socialism creates will form here also.
--
The problem is as simple as can be.
When people are told they are entitled to the products of others work,and they fall for it,they begin to "see" they no longer need to work themselves.It then becomes "okay" for them to work less,or even not at all,in their mind. Well, socialism isn't exactly that, socialism bases its distrubition on the principle of work, so if you don't work you get less. While communism would be more correct in that eg. since they distrubute equally, no mather what.
This means theres less to go around.Less people bothering to produce,and even less production from those. True for communism, kinda fuzzy for Socialism.
And as people see their work efforts being taken from them,they lose even more incentive to work.Lessening production even more
Where did their work go?
This means theres even less to go around.And now even more who want it.
As the product supplies dwindles,those who believe they are entitled to it decide its fine for them to take it themselves .The government isnt giving them what it told them they were entitled to,and so they must now themselves take for themselves what their government has failed to take for them. I have fallen of the track
Those who are have some,now become the target of those who want.The government says they are both entitled to it,and both now feel justified in taking from each other.Without a rational theme of "you get what you earn",both now have nothing to guide them in deciding what and how much they should have,and how they should get it,other than the claim that they are entitled to it.
It called conflict.You now have competing members of the population all told they are entitled to things,that there isnt enough of to go around.AND people who have been told thats it okay for the government to take things from others via force,to give to them.And hence its okay for them to do the same.
And it becomes okay to steal that loaf of bread,even when those its stolen from needed it just as much,because the story is told of how "they were entitled to the bread as much as the other guy,and society is responsible in the end for not supplying the bread to all.The thief was just doing what it had to,its not his fault ".I have no idea what your talking about in this middle section and what it has to do with "Socialism". Care to explain?
Welcome to socialism.Welcome to the killing fields.Well, I don't know how much socialists have killed, but Communists where they who where the most agressive and dangerous.
Just put a handful of junkies in need of their fix,in a locked room with only enough of their chosen drug for one.Its the same dynamic.Keep them there,and each day only put enough of the drug into the room for one......what does a junkie have to do with this kind of politics. Capitalism, Anarchism, Nationalism etc have Junkies too??? Don't US have a big drug problem, they ain't socialist.
Violence will be the end result,its just a matter of how long til its reached.
And all it takes is for the lessening of production and available product that socialism promotes,to move production lower than the consumption it also promotes.
Here's some reading for you, if you mix ideologies
http://www.socialismvscommunism.org/
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-dif ... munism.htm
. Communism is a violent branch of Socialism, National Socialism is based on Nationalism who took socialistic ideas and incorporated it into it. And what does green-anarchism have to do with anything?![[_]OT](./images/smilies/offtopic.gif "[_]OT"){kind=small}
. So to conclude the Socialism debate here in this thread about US elections, Do you think social democracy is the same as Commusim/socialism?