Election 2020

[Bi_3]

Sanders goes full dipshit. You never go full dipshit:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/b ... een-tried/

This is the “dipshit” comment (I assume) if people wanna see it.

“What happened and existed in the Soviet Union was not socialism. It was authoritarian Communism,” Bernie replied, inducing a bunch of his historically illiterate fans to applaud.

“And Communism,” Bernie goes on, “whether in Cuba, whether in the Soviet Union or whether in other countries was marked by totalitarianism, was marked by throwing millions of people into the Gulag.”

Attempting to use a little understood academic distinction to hide your support for suppression of agency is on brand for sanders & co, and you’ve got to be a dipshit to pull out that as a excuse for your support of an ideology that slaughtered tens of millions in the lifetime of many people alive today. Bernie may think the Soviet Socialists weren’t real socialists, the Nationalsozialistische weren’t real socialists, the Maoist’s, etc, but the people massacring other humans in the name of Socialism certainly believed they were

[Jorge]

Bernie's right though

[Bi_3]

Bernie's right though

He’s right in the same way that 3.14 is not pi


And just like pi he’s

Spoiler: show

irrational

[Jorge]

Legitimately one of the worst posts of all time

[Rob]

It is you, BI_3, trying to rationalize. You’re attempting to define socialism through a very narrow lens, the same one people use reflexively. Technically, a pubic school system in Anytown, USA is a socialist endeavor. There is a lot of space in between.

[Bi_3]

It is you, BI_3, trying to rationalize. You’re attempting to define socialism through a very narrow lens, the same one people use reflexively. Technically, a pubic school system in Anytown, USA is a socialist endeavor. There is a lot of space in between.

I was suggesting it was in fact Bernie who was using the narrow definition (“real socialism”, what ever that amorphous target is) to avoid associating his movement with the other socialists movements... it’s the tired “this time it will be different” con.

I would agree that government monopolies have socialist aspects, but that is not for this thread.

[BurtReynolds]

[96583UP]

Bernie was right

this is an old Ras Trentist clarification

(courtesy Noam Chomsky)

[96583UP]

BUT IN OTHER NEWS:

Biden cleaning house in the Dem primaries

[96583UP]

And telling some guy on the campaign trail he is 'full of shit' (i am totally fine w that - we live in a realtalk era now)

[Anders]

There's no doubt that there's a difference beween social democracy, socialism and communism. Europe has lots of different parties, including parties from those three categories. They can work together on some issues, but do have very different policies as well.

[Angus]

How pretty much everyone in the US got brainwashed into thinking socialism = evil/communism/gulag/millions death/..., is one of the most increbible accomplishments of the last 100 years.

[BurtReynolds]

the last two posts contradict each other.

[Birds in Hell]

How?

[BurtReynolds]

Well Anders says that there are many kinds of socialism (including communism), but Angus seems to suggest that soviet communism isn't real socialism.

But I misread him.

Sanders is saying that the USSR wasn't real socialism, though, and he is very wrong.

[BurtReynolds]

Socialism isn't just evil/communism/gulag/millions death, it just includes it.

Then there is nazism [yes, it was] and all sorts of other wonderful fantasy socialisms that will never be...

[Angus]

I also find it quite baffling you always need to refer to the USSR as well.

Have a look at what socialism brough most western European countries the last 75 years. Have a look at the difference between EU & UK since Thatcher destroyed the unions.

And I won't even start on that nazi remark. If you're taking that as a proof why socialism is bad, then I'm done. Have all the fun in the world with 4 more years.

The difference in perception in EU & US is huge. It absolutely amazes me.

[BurtReynolds]

I also find it quite baffling you always need to refer to the USSR as well.

I don't think I've referred to the USSR in awhile...

Have a look at what socialism brough most western European countries the last 75 years. Have a look at the difference between EU & UK since Thatcher destroyed the unions.

I'm sure this will be a pointless road to go down with you, so let's not.

And I won't even start on that nazi remark. If you're taking that as a proof why socialism is bad, then I'm done. Have all the fun in the world with 4 more years.

it's an example of socialism being bad. It's not proof that all socialism is bad (though I have arguments for that).

The difference in perception in EU & US is huge. It absolutely amazes me.

on this we agree at least, though I think Europe's move towards freedom was crippled by Rousseau from the onset, so you never really got it.

[Anders]

Hitler and the Nazis basically ruin any discussion, but the Nazis weren't socialist. In fact they banned the Social Democratic Party and the Communist Party, and considered them their main political enemies.

While socialists are globalists and fight for universal rights, the nazis (who called themselves national socialist) were only focused on race and the Germanic people.

Hitler was part of the militaristic and authoritarian right. The Nazis themselves placed themselved in the middle of a left-right spectre. Extremism from the centre, a third way. Not pure capitalism or socialism, but a new society.

Obviously they were also completely bonkers and mad, and we're all glad they got destroyed.

[BurtReynolds]

Hitler and the Nazis basically ruin any discussion, but the Nazis weren't socialist. In fact they banned the Social Democratic Party and the Communist Party, and considered them their main political enemies.

While socialists are globalists and fight for universal rights, the nazis (who called themselves national socialist) were only focused on race and the Germanic people.

Hitler was part of the militaristic and authoritarian right. The Nazis themselves placed themselved in the middle of a left-right spectre. Extremism from the centre, a third way. Not pure capitalism or socialism, but a new society.

Obviously they were also completely bonkers and mad, and we're all glad they got destroyed.

Socialists killing other socialists over power grabs is not proof that they weren't socialists. It's practically a requirement.

If you are going to argue that social democracy is socialism, then the nazis certainly were by that broad definition. Their economic system was practically the same lol. They just had a much narrower view of what constitutes citizenry.

There is so much equivocation. Socialists often argue for a broad definition of socialist-- even pre-marxist ones-- when it suits them, then switch to a narrow one when Nazis get brought up. You can't have it both ways.

I've heard all this bullshit before.