Image

Socialists Against Socialism

User avatar
Prog Off
It would seem like we dreadfully misjudged the socialists over the many centuries they've been around. According to at least some socialist factions, they are against big government socialism.

Now, perhaps this is just another way of claiming failed socialist regimes of the past weren't actually socialist, but that denial of reality places them in quite the quandary. For if they truly are against past government control of the economy, then it would stand to reason that they should be against the same in the future.

In other words, they can either be against big government or be absolved of socialism crimes against humanity….. BUT NOT BOTH. Consider this graphic from our comrades of the Official Socialist Party of Great Britain [SPGB]:

Socialism for Dummies resized 50.jpg
Instead of a group of government people owning and controlling the means of production, they want a group of people owning and controlling the means of production… or something.

Or Consider this video: Socialism in 5 Minutes



From Socialism Explained

Partial transcript:

“So what is socialism if we're doing like the dictionary definition its defined as a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production distribution is exchanged be able to regulate it by the community as a whole”
[..]
But wait you may think doesn't that mean Big Brother government comes in well short answer NO, long answer NO
[..]
Bonus round here's what socialism is not libraries, public health care free tuition these are not socialism
Luminaries of the Left such as R.D. Wolf have made it abundantly clear that true socialism can only be when the people own and control the means of production, but not when those people are a government..

If you are a true masochist, there is this video: Socialism For Dummies.



[Those are merely posted for reference – there is really no advantage to suffering through the BS]

Contrast these obfuscations with the partial Merriam Webster dictionary definition of the term Socialism:

a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
Therefore, in trying to deny their blood-soaked past, socialists are advocating the exact opposite of what they profess. Hence the slogan: Socialists against Socialism.

It should also follow that said Socialists should be against the government take-over with National Socialized Healthcare.

So, this places the nation's socialist in a severe dilemma – oppose the nationalization of ‘the means of production', which would include Obamacare and single payer.

Or, be permanently affixed to the mass murderer and oppression of their collectivist brethren.

Either they use this ruse and work against national Socialized Healthcare and other socialist schemes….

…Or they have to admit that socialist regimes of the past were actually Socialist.

Sucks to be them, I suppose.

P.S. I must add the proviso that the websites of the Official Socialist Party of Great Britain [SPGB] could merely be a parody site with some of the items they've posted.

User avatar
One other Item from the FAQ for the SPGB:

SPGB FAQ3 cropped.jpg

User avatar
As the interim provisional acting director of the Antarctic Socialist Society (A.S.S.) I commissioned a study of the socialist historical record, which found the following:

  • The 1917 revolution was most definitely intended to be a true Marxist revolution
  • However, the Anglo-Frankish imperiocapitalists intervened militarily in an attempt to crush the revolution, re-establish the WWI eastern front, and prolong their Great War™, from which they expected to profit immensely
  • When that effort failed they created and nurtured the fascist heresies in Germany, Italy, and Spain in the hopes that these nations would band together and engage in an endless war of attrition against True Socialism™, from which they expected to profit immensely.
  • When that failed and they had to go to war with their fascist creations—from which they profited immensely—they turned to nuclear weapons
  • Then, when through a heroic effort of scientific might the Soviet Union created its own nuclear weapons, they started proxy wars in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, from which they profited immensely (even when they occasionally 'lost').
  • At the same time they opened a second, more insidious front with their Popular Culture™ to corrupt the spirit of the New Soviet Men & Women™, from which they (the imperiocapitalists) profited immensely
  • After the Berlin Wall™, Iron Curtain™, and Soviet Union collapsed, they concentrated their warring efforts on the poor, unsuspecting, peaceful Islamic peoples of the Middle East and central Asia, from which they continue to profit immensely

As any goodthinking comrade can clearly see, the imperiocapitalist's greedy lust for profits doomed the revolution right from the beginning; under this constant hateful onslaught true Marxist socialism was never given a fair chance in a suitable Safe Space™ in which to succeed.

User avatar
Socialism is the rationalizations that legitimize collectivism. And then when those don't work anymore socialism is the rationalizations of the rationalizations. And when those become obvious flop-doddle socialism is the rationalizations of the rationalizations of the rationalizations of collectivism. ad nausium.

Collectivism is the idea that everyone owns everything in the world. It's a description of the human condition without any understanding of human individual rights. It's how an animal would describe the fundamental animal condition in the wild if animals were to somehow get an inkling of Man's ability to think abstractly.

Collectivism is how an animal would describe the human condition - theres just a forest of stuff and all animals should get their fair share and no animal should hog more of the forest than what he needs (social justice). Socialism is the rationalizations that actual humans (those whose cognitive functioning is so insipid and shallow that they barely understand the human condition better than an animal's plane of understanding can give them) use to justify themselves to actual adult human beings.

A lot of people aren't actually as intellectually negligible as collectivists but all they've ever known is the rationalizations. And with rationalizations within rationalizations within rationalizations for what is basically a animal sort of very limited understanding of the human condition it can be very hard for normal people to find their way out.

Unfortunately that animal-like understanding of the human condition given rein to express itself fully on society eventually reduces people down to that level. Society goes feral. People go feral. And civilization gives way to the encroaching wild.

User avatar
Imperatorskiy Pingvin wrote:As the interim provisional acting director of the Antarctic Socialist Society (A.S.S.) I commissioned a study of the socialist historical record, which found the following.
[..]
As any goodthinking comrade can clearly see, the imperiocapitalist's greedy lust for profits doomed the revolution right from the beginning; under this constant hateful onslaught true Marxist socialism was never given a fair chance in a suitable Safe Space™ in which to succeed.
Of course, the wonderful world of next Tuesday is never allowed to materialize because of those greedy capitalists who insist on freedom and liberty.

User avatar
$.$. Halliburton wrote:Socialism is the rationalizations that legitimize collectivism. And then when those don't work anymore socialism is the rationalizations of the rationalizations. And when those become obvious flop-doddle socialism is the rationalizations of the rationalizations of the rationalizations of collectivism. ad nausium.

Collectivism is the idea that everyone owns everything in the world. It's a description of the human condition without any understanding of human individual rights. It's how an animal would describe the fundamental animal condition in the wild if animals were to somehow get an inkling of Man's ability to think abstractly.

Collectivism is how an animal would describe the human condition - theres just a forest of stuff and all animals should get their fair share and no animal should hog more of the forest than what he needs (social justice). Socialism is the rationalizations that actual humans (those whose cognitive functioning is so insipid and shallow that they barely understand the human condition better than an animal's plane of understanding can give them) use to justify themselves to actual adult human beings.
Prog off
One of the ‘complaints' of the socialists* is that the free market ‘forces people to work in order to live'. The problem for them is that this has been the case with every living being since the beginning of time.

Every living thing from bacteria to Brachiosaurus has had to ‘work' in order to eat. This is called a basic fact of life. The only other choice is to force someone else to work in order for one to eat – this is called Slavery – and it is the basis for socialism.

The problem the arises that force has to be utilized in order to get people to work so that others can enjoy the fruits of their labours. This can come in the form of a group of Chekists (or Gestapo) to Colectivos shooting innocent people on the streets of Caracas.

User avatar
Fhalkyn wrote:
Image
I seem to recall societies almost exactly like the ones these "modern" socialists espouse being established at Plymouth Rock and Jamestown. If memory serves, they didn't end well, and could only be rescued by good-old-fashioned capitalism.
But then, they were filthy colonies established by racist cisgendered heterosexual colonial white men, so we just ignore that...
This is so very true - after all, it is based on ancient ideas that 'reach back almost as far as recorded thought'. As well as other examples of it's collective failure:

From the Encyclopedia Britannica on the origins of Socialism:

The origins of socialism as a political movement lie in the Industrial Revolution. Its intellectual roots, however, reach back almost as far as recorded thought—even as far as Moses, according to one history of the subject. Socialist or communist ideas certainly play an important part in the ideas of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato.

Christianity and Platonism were combined in More's Utopia, which apparently recommends communal ownership as a way of controlling the sins of pride, envy, and greed. Land and houses are common property on More's imaginary island of Utopia.
[Published in 1516 500 years ago!]

More's Utopia is not so much a blueprint for a socialist society as it is a commentary on the failings he perceived in the supposedly Christian societies of his day. Religious and political turmoil, however, soon inspired others to try to put utopian ideas into practice.

Several communist or socialist sects sprang up in England in the wake of the Civil Wars (1642–51). Chief among them was the Diggers, whose members claimed that God had created the world for people to share, not to divide and exploit for private profit. When they acted on this belief by digging and planting on land that was not legally theirs, they ran afoul of Oliver Cromwell's Protectorate, which forcibly disbanded them.
….
Another early socialist, Robert Owen, was himself an industrialist.
Owen set out in 1825 to establish a model of social organization, New Harmony, on land he had purchased in the U.S. state of Indiana. This was to be a self-sufficient, cooperative community in which property was commonly owned. New Harmony failed within a few years, taking most of Owen's fortune with it.

User avatar
Comrade Torcer wrote:Every living thing from bacteria to Brachiosaurus has had to ‘work' in order to eat. This is called a basic fact of life. The only other choice is to force someone else to work in order for one to eat – this is called Slavery – and it is the basis for socialism.

In the end they have to face the fact that the means of production are people. YOU are the means of production.

But that isn't the basis of socialism. The basis of socialism is collectivism.

Slavery is a consequence of implementing the ideas of the nature of Man and Man's relation to reality that is known as Collectivism.

Socialism, communism, fascism are all just different forms of rationalizations for collectivism.

User avatar
It all boils down to the fact that the collectivist ideologies are all parasitic on economic liberty.

Those ideologies - no matter their label - cannot exist without feeding off the productive.



 
POST REPLY