When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
i'm quite fine with retribution... just find it funny how the most anti "socialism" states are the ones where the funds go.
It's not really funny, it makes complete sense.
Taxes from resource-rich and densely populated states go to lower-population, lower-income, lower-tax, lower-education, lower-resources states. That's pretty much exactly how redistribution works. They states they go to are pretty ******* shitty and still benefit the poor democrats that live there too...
We could just end federal taxes and programs. I'd be okay with that, solves that problem!
One can also argue the social welfare programs are not "socialism."
My big point about the Trump Foundation was that you called Trump a criminal, and then his offspring criminals as well, and suggested they "fraudulently misuse charity funds" and linked to a story referencing the $2mm settlement agreement. It's a complete misrepresentation of the issue with that case.
Your tax dollars at work: paying settlements to vandals.
Appeals court approves of $6.7M award to 5Pointz graffiti artists
Posted: 7:01 PM, Feb 20, 2020
By: Associated Press
LONG ISLAND CITY, Queens — A federal appeals court in New York has approved a $6.7 million award for graffiti artists after their spray paintings were destroyed to make room for high-rise luxury residences.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday. A three-judge panel concluded that a Brooklyn federal judge was correct to award the damages against developers who destroyed the aerosol artwork.
The destruction violated the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990.
The Long Island City, Queens, graffiti site known as 5Pointz was a tourist attraction that drew thousands of spectators daily and formed a backdrop to the 2013 movie, “Now You See Me.”
But not only is trump a criminal, he's a Russian Asset.
Thursday on MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell reacted to reports that President Donald Trump was angered after intelligence officials told a bipartisan group of House members that Russia was attempting to get Trump re-elected.
O’Donnell said, “The president is a Russian operative. That sounds like the description of a bad Hollywood screenplay, but it is real. It is Vladimir Putin’s greatest achievement, decades after America’s victory in the Cold War and collapse of the Soviet Union, the president of the United States is now helping the president of Russia help the president of the United States to get re-elected. So that the president of Russia will have four more years of the president of the United States who he wants in the Oval Office, this is one of those shocking news days if you retain the capacity to be shocked in the Trump era by the Trump regime, which might be better labeled the Trump-Putin regime.”
Discussing outgoing Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire being replaced by Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell after the briefing, O’Donnell said, “Donald Trump is operating in the White House in conjunction with Vladimir Putin to hide what Vladimir Putin is doing to help Donald Trump get re-elected. Donald Trump is a Russian operative — if tonight’s reporting by The Washington Post and The New York Times is true. And everything else we know about Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin indicates that it is true.”
He added, “This is a darkly momentous event in the history of this country in the history of this world. Vladimir Putin has become Donald Trump’s running mate once again.”
Can anyone truly define socialism that is not garnered from social media or news networks?? I ask as every time I hear someone scream "socialists are bad!" They have been the very benefactor of such structure.
Or the fact that socialism seems to always be link with ****. Which is only true on face value and doesn't captured the nuanced argument that the **** overthrew the Socialist of Germany and used this platform for their propaganda. Similar to how trump has overthrown the "classic" GOP and now re branded as the the party of trump. A party that, for example, always voices fiscal conservative, but yet, the budget has balloon to extreme levels under trump.....
It was more of a general question btw and more of a nod to the trend the last 20+ years of not involving the nuanced elements of discussion. Just regurgitating what one is told
Government controls the means of production and distribution of all goods and services.
That does that necessarily extend that government-controlled social welfare programs is socialism, at least not as our economic model. Maybe a small form, but I personally see nothing wrong with parachute programs that actually help our citizens in need -- better than most the crap we spend money on.
Shall we agree to disagree? I don't think they argue anything well. Their leading argument is that the **** goal was totalitarian racial control. So because they were racists that means they couldn't be socialists? Or maybe even communists?
At least under the argument of totalitarian control, would most of 20th century Russia then be considered not communist? Or would Snopes argue they were true communists since they didn't care whom they starved?
This article is simply propaganda to maintain that ****'s were Right Wing. Hey, weren't Democrats in the early part of the 20th century the party of the KKK? Does that mean that Democrats aren't truly Left Wing? Maybe they can write about that next.
You want us to define socialism but argue that a **** is not a socialist? I hope you jest.
I would strongly advise you pick up a history book and read just how the **** party came to power. If you are categorically dismissing FACTUAL history, because you simply do not agree, then we are lost as a nation....
As mentioned, nuanced discussion. What I am debating is NOT that they were not socialists (in name only). What I debating is the incorrect designation of attaching the moniker of socialist to the Hitler party as the two have drastically differing motivations. You are essentially ignoring the actual proliferation of the **** regime and focusing (incorrectly so) on the name only.
Here is a history lesson from Britannica demonstrating how the **** party came to power and the ousting of the Socialist party leader at the time. Very similar to current day gop being taken over by the trump camp.....
I think your post essentially demonstrates exactly what I getting at; nuanced discussion.....
**** Party, byname of National Socialist German Workers’ Party, German Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP), political party of the mass movement known as National Socialism. Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to power in Germany in 1933 and governed by totalitarian methods until 1945
It was founded as the German Workers’ Party by Anton Drexler, a Munich locksmith, in 1919. Hitler attended one of its meetings that year, and before long his energy and oratorical skills would enable him to take over the party, which was renamed National Socialist German Workers’ Party in 1920. That year Hitler also formulated a 25-point program that became the permanent basis for the party. The program called for German abandonment of the Treaty of Versailles and for the expansion of German territory. These appeals for national aggrandizement were accompanied by a strident anti-Semitic rhetoric. The party’s socialist orientation was basically a demagogic gambit designed to attract support from the working class. By 1921 Hitler had ousted the party’s other leaders and taken over.
There are many examples of birds of the same feather fighting each other for control. Right now you have the Democrats fighting each other for the presidential nomination.
I don't believe it is a nuanced discussion to say that someone will tell you what you want to hear in order to govern you. If we need to discuss that, then we are truly lost as a nation.
And again, just because the **** Party was plain ******* evil, it does not exclude them from being socialists or having socialists principles. Anti-communists writers will say Stalin was not that nice of a man either. Does that exclude him from being a communist? Especially since he didn't see eye-to-eye with other communists?
You don't seem to care much for Orange Man. You've already stated that he's overtaken the GOP twice. I think if you were to be updating his Wikipedia page with that rhetoric you might just get a *citation needed.
.........So then, I ask again; what is a socialist?? Your answer has simply been; they are *****.
And regardless of caring for the orange man, that has no bearing on the fact that he has overtaken the gop and made it his own party.
As I mentioned before; if the party of the gop was a true conservative then the deficit wouldn't be as high as it is currently for example (which you have seemingly glossed over).
P.S you still haven;t addressed the historical fact of WHAT the ***** did with the socialist party. Also, overthrowing a party, is NOT the same as party transition. Stop conflating the two.....
And PS. Thanks for whoever gave me a negative cat for simply asking a general question to define socialism.....
As mentioned, nuanced discussion. What I am debating is NOT that they were not socialists (in name only).
I'm not sure if I'm interpreting your meaning clearly. Are you arguing that Germany, during the **** era, was not a socialist state? Or that it WAS a socialist state, and not just in name only?
If the former, then I disagree. While Nazism was a very complex ideology which combined elements of many different philosophies, socialism bordering on communism was most certainly one of them. Which is ironic, given the outwardly anti-communist stance of the party.
For one, the party featured central planning of economic activity and industrial production. Some industries were nationalized as part of the war effort. And those businesses which were privately owned often operated under state mandate, a quota system, etc.
Education was strictly controlled by the state. Curricula and textbooks were carefully vetted for compatibility with party doctrine, much as public school curricula in the American south are sometimes edited to avoid incompatibility with religious doctrine. While "private" schools did technically exist in **** Germany, their curriculum was again state-mandated.
Kraft durch Freude (Strength through Joy) was the name of the state-run leisure and recreation industry. The state provided cruises, vacations, concerts, ski-trips, athletic clubs, and so on as a reward for productive and party-loyal workers, always with an element of political indoctrination included. (further reading)
KdF was also directly responsible for the creation of the Volkswagen (the People's Car), built in a state-run factory and offered for purchase to citizens via a state-run savings program. (No cars were ever actually delivered to customers, due to wartime appropriation of the money which had been paid into the savings plan to fund military production.)
Here in the US, we have the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts of the USA. Both are para-religious organizations which, aside from receiving favorable tax treatment, are completely autonomous from the state. In **** Germany, the roughly analogous organizations would be the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth) and the Jugendbund (Youth League), which were state-run agencies whose mandates consisted primarily of indoctrination into party philosophy.
In particular, the Hitlerjugend promoted the idea of a "classless society," which is about as socialist as you can get.
.........So then, I ask again; what is a socialist?? Your answer has simply been; they are *****.
And regardless of caring for the orange man, that has no bearing on the fact that he has overtaken the gop and made it his own party.
As I mentioned before; if the party of the gop was a true conservative then the deficit wouldn't be as high as it is currently for example (which you have seemingly glossed over).
P.S you still haven;t addressed the historical fact of WHAT the ***** did with the socialist party. Also, overthrowing a party, is NOT the same as party transition. Stop conflating the two.....
And PS. Thanks for whoever gave me a negative cat for simply asking a general question to define socialism.....
To your first question; that is a nuanced discussion, as you like to use the term. But I would say that any system that has the government heavily involved in the means of production and has its citizens heavily dependent on them has socialist written all over them. Also, I have not said that socialists are ***** but the other way around. Stop conflating what I wrote.
To the Orange Man argument; he is the President of the country and he's a Republican. I would expect his policies be backed by those of his party members especially in this heavily partisan era of government. The ruling government wants to stay in government. They back the incumbent, plain and simple.
To your 3rd point; I haven't argued anything about the debt. It is high and you are correct. Orange Man also said he would build a wall and get rid of the ACA. He hasn't done those things either. But like I mentioned in my earlier response, politicians will tell you what you want to hear in order to govern you.
To your 4th point, I'm done responding to the argument that Hitler was or wasn't a Socialist. But whatever he did to the socialist party he also did to any other political party that would try to go against him because he was a tyrant. So was Fidel Castro and many will write that he was a socialist. And please don't try to argue how nice of a guy Castro was. I was born in that shithole country and don't take kindly to people who try to put him in a good light.
As to your 5th point, I like how the old system was that no one was given cats in this sub-forum. Political views shouldn't be judged.
Government central planning controlling business practices and production is socialism whether in 1940 Deutschland or 2020 Estados Unidos. The National Socialist party was pretty darn socialist.
Or the fact that socialism seems to always be link with ****. Which is only true on face value and doesn't captured the nuanced argument that the **** overthrew the Socialist of Germany and used this platform for their propaganda.
Those who typically yell "socialism is bad," are usually yelled at in return: fascist ****!
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
But to say ***** are socialist, at least when we are talking about Hitler, is not necessarily true. See: Night of the Long Knives.
He assassinated socialists leaders to prevent Germany from just being socialist, and to continue building his war machines...
The fact that the **** party rose to power via a series of assassinations has nothing at all to do with the policies which they enacted in the decades which followed.
If one socialist murders another socialist, that not make the first socialist a non-socialist.
02-20-2020, 09:06 PM
1
