• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Democracy Vs Socialism

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Me said:
How do you ignore a poster? [Talking about Robodoon]

Ah, it's in the buddy/ignore lists. My day is now complete :p
 

FreeThinker

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
34
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Herophant said:
Well the fact is that your nation based on property rights grew from its original 13 states through conquest from Spain and Mexico? Not to mention a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in the case of those various "Indian" nations who were nearly all eliminated in one of the largest land grabs in modern history" (Cox 2004:598-599)


Michael Cox (2004) "Empire imperialism and the bush doctrine" Review of international Studies, 30

Hay good job going from a debate about free market economy vs socialist to America was founded by landgrabbing savages.

Good job responding to someone else's post by needlessly attacking America.

You win.
 

FreeThinker

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
1,001
Reaction score
34
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
ANYWAY back to what the topic originally was.

The poster asked the question: what does the media mean today when they refer to socialism vs democracy.

He didn't ask for long winded dissertations by college professors on the true meaning of each.

As far as the media is concerned, democracy vs socialism refers to loose government control vs strict government control. That's what the media is trying to say in their own screwed up language.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Herophant said:
Well the fact is that your nation based on property rights grew from its original 13 states through conquest from Spain and Mexico? Not to mention a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in the case of those various "Indian" nations who were nearly all eliminated in one of the largest land grabs in modern history" (Cox 2004:598-599)


Michael Cox (2004) "Empire imperialism and the bush doctrine" Review of international Studies, 30

No actually the facts implicate Mexico, they attacked our soldiers first after all, Mexican forces moved over the rio grande to attack one of our forts if you really want to get technical. But it really doesn't matter due to American exceptionalism which I am a firm believer in. The Mexican tyrants should have left the Republic of Texas alone . . . nuff said.



REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Last edited:

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Dude the very basic premise of Marx's Communist Manifesto is that Socialism is a better economic system than Capitalism and the two can not coexist or intermingle
I'll generally agree.
because the only economic system which is condusive to liberty is Capitalism
Isn't that more like a personal opinion?
something that has been proven with every system of Government to be created based on his tennants
Must have missed the "proven" part. There have been many capitalistic dictators and authoritian regimes.
Without life, liberty, and property a man can not truly be free.
Again, just another worthless personal opinion.
Locke wrote the
2nd Treatise of Government which is the very basis for the United State's Constitution and Bill of Rights
So?
and you're going to tell me that he wasn't a social philosopher?
The definition of a philosopher is not what people did in their name, its what they did, as far as I know Locke didn't theorise or philosophise how society works, as far as I know he philosophised about an individual. Marx was a social philosopher, his economic superstructure idea was enough to do that also contributed more.
If you don't know who Locke is or understand his philosophy then you have no idea what the U.S. is founded on.
You're assuming I care what philosophy the US Constitution was based upon.
Why do you cling so strongly to the ideology of a discredited philosopher (Marx)
I don't care what other people think of him. If you don't like him, then that's your opinion.
when the ideology of another philosopher has been proven to be so successful (Locke)?
No one is proven to be successful.
As far as the media is concerned, democracy vs socialism refers to loose government control vs strict government control.
Which is the strict state control?
 

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ivan The Terrible said:
A poster earlier said this,



The United States has never been a true capitalist society! How did we see it fail?

This garbage about the US not capitalist belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Forum.
 

fooligan

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Location
G.R. MI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Loxd4 said:
Socialism is supposed to be like a man-made-utopia.


Be careful whose Koolaid you're drinking.

Democracy refers to a system where the people elect their leaders.

Socialism is an economic system, where the government controls... well, everything economic and whatever else there is.

Socialism is a threat to any democracy because socialist governments are inherently iron-fisted when it comes to freedom. I.E. you have none.
 

Herophant

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
fooligan said:
Be careful whose Koolaid you're drinking.

Democracy refers to a system where the people elect their leaders.

Socialism is an economic system, where the government controls... well, everything economic and whatever else there is.

Socialism is a threat to any democracy because socialist governments are inherently iron-fisted when it comes to freedom. I.E. you have none.


Weird i have a socialst goverment right now. Based on parties like the labour party and the socialist left party. They are actualy working with increasing my personal freedoms, althrough yes they are placing some finanical constraints.
 

Herophant

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
FreeThinker said:
Hay good job going from a debate about free market economy vs socialist to America was founded by landgrabbing savages.

Good job responding to someone else's post by needlessly attacking America.

You win.

Let my try to place the argument in context from my point of view.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Without life, liberty, and property a man can not truly be free. Locke wrote the
2nd Treatise of Government which is the very basis for the United State's Constitution and Bill of Rights and you're going to tell me that he wasn't a social philosopher? If you don't know who Locke is or understand his philosophy then you have no idea what the U.S. is founded on.

jfuh said:
Same old denying facts all the time huh tot?

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Denying facts? Why is it the people who are the least educated in these matters are always the ones who love to use the term facts without actually presenting any?

Herophant said:
Well the fact is that your nation based on property rights grew from its original 13 states through conquest from Spain and Mexico? Not to mention a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in the case of those various "Indian" nations who were nearly all eliminated in one of the largest land grabs in modern history" (Cox 2004:598-599)


Michael Cox (2004) "Empire imperialism and the bush doctrine" Review of international Studies, 30

Sorry for going of topic, but when i see something untrue i feel an urge to enlighten.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
:lol:
Comrade Brian said:
I'll generally agree.

Good because it's correct.
Isn't that more like a personal opinion?

No that's the lesson of history bub.
Must have missed the "proven" part. There have been many capitalistic dictators and authoritian regimes.

That's because they had no political freedom, without political freedom there can be no economic freedom and without economic freedom there can be no political freedom.
Again, just another worthless personal opinion.

No it's not that's the lesson of history.


You can't say that Locke wasn't a social philosopher when his best known work is the very basis for Western society.
The definition of a philosopher is not what people did in their name, its what they did, as far as I know Locke didn't theorise or philosophise how society works, as far as I know he philosophised about an individual. Marx was a social philosopher, his economic superstructure idea was enough to do that also contributed more.

No Locke theorized how both government, society, and the individual in the society works, seriously don't comment on things you know nothing about.
You're assuming I care what philosophy the US Constitution was based upon.

You're saying that Locke wasn't a social philosopher yet you don't even understand that his works is what the American society is based on. :roll:
I don't care what other people think of him. If you don't like him, then that's your opinion.

LOL People didn't discredit him history did.
No one is proven to be successful.

History has proven that when a society is formed based on the ideas presented in the 2nd Treatise of Government then freedom and prosperity will be the result . . . do you know where America is?
 
Last edited:

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Comrade Brian said:
This garbage about the US not capitalist belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Forum.


any country that intervenes in an economy revokes their right to capitalism in its truest, most Austrian-Libertarian, form.

So the USA is not capitalist, its a strange blend of private enterprise and state controls.
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,877
Reaction score
1,714
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
:lol:

Good because it's correct.


No that's the lesson of history bub.


That's because they had no political freedom, without political freedom there can be no economic freedom and without economic freedom there can be no political freedom.

No it's not that's the lesson of history.



You can't say that Locke wasn't a social philosopher when his best known work is the very basis for Western society.


No Locke theorized how both government, society, and the individual in the society works, seriously don't comment on things you know nothing about.


You're saying that Locke wasn't a social philosopher yet you don't even understand that his works is what the American society is based on. :roll:


LOL People didn't discredit him history did.


History has proven that when a society is formed based on the ideas presented in the 2nd Treatise of Government then freedom and prosperity will be the result . . . do you know where America is?

The problem with your argument about economic freedom is that capatalism argueably does not give people economic freedom. Under capatalim the economy is controlled by the leadership of corporations which are run for the benefit of the rich. The way in which the economy is controlled by a minority is undemocratic and creates a lack of economic and personal freedom in the lives of many people. Under socialism resources can be controlled by the people [Through the ballot box and other methods to varrying degrees, depending on the type of socialism] So in this sence socialism can be more democratic when it gives people the freedom to control the resources and buissnesses that have a major effect on there lives.
 

Falangist

New member
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
As for myself, my economic theory is largely national syndicalist, so I tend to be anti-socialist and anti-capitalist at the same time. I just don't think either is the answer.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Herophant said:
Let my try to place the argument in context from my point of view.









Sorry for going of topic, but when i see something untrue i feel an urge to enlighten.

LMFAO the original 13 colonies were not conquered from Spain the British always controlled them and founded them, France, Britain, Spain, Portugal the Dutch, all at one time or another had colonial settlements in North and Sourth America and as for the ethnic cleansing it was not a systematic genocide IE the majority of Indians were killed by disease accidently it was not intentional to call what happened to the Indians genocide is to degrade the term and put into peoples minds that what happened in colonial America is akin to Nazi Germany which couldn't be further from the truth. Furthermore; far from a utopia as revisionist historians like to paint pre-colonial America, the lands were sparcely populated, the inhabitants were constantly on the verge of starvation and even resulted to cannabilism, they were constantly warring with one anothers tribes, and they hadn't even invented the wheel. The socialists have lost the battle of ideas through the lessons of history so now they attempt to rewrite history to suit their ends. Anyways you're confusing the policies of the British crown with the policies of the post-revolution Republic. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution were both based on Locke's Second Treatise of Government, you sir no not what you are talking about.
 
Last edited:

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Free Thinker said:
As far as the media is concerned, democracy vs socialism refers to loose government control vs strict government control. That's what the media is trying to say in their own screwed up language.

It is the simple attempt to make socialism seem the opposite of democracy.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
No actually the facts implicate Mexico, they attacked our soldiers first after all, Mexican forces moved over the rio grande to attack one of our forts if you really want to get technical. But it really doesn't matter due to American exceptionalism which I am a firm believer in. The Mexican tyrants should have left the Republic of Texas alone . . . nuff said.

If you want to get "technical" Mexico owned all that land, and was not crossing their border at the Rio Grande, anymore than a US citizen does when they cross the Mississippi.

Texans were Mexican citizens and when the catholic Mexicans told them to stop having slaves they rebelled. Almost exactly like the secession of the Southern states years later, only not as long winded. Texas won, and were their own republic for a while, and later became a state.

Dude the very basic premise of Marx's Communist Manifesto is that Socialism is a better economic system than Capitalism and the two can not coexist or intermingle

Socialism is not Marxism.

Comrade Brian said:
because the only economic system which is condusive to liberty is Capitalism

Isn't that more like a personal opinion?

Assuming by capitalism he means modified capitalism (capitalism-socialism hybrid), then his opinion would be supported by historical fact.'

Comrade Brian said:
If you don't know who Locke is or understand his philosophy then you have no idea what the U.S. is founded on.

You're assuming I care what philosophy the US Constitution was based upon.

Then you would be ignoring the longest lasting nation defining document.

Comrade Brian said:
Why do you cling so strongly to the ideology of a discredited philosopher (Marx)

I don't care what other people think of him. If you don't like him, then that's your opinion.

History doesn't like him either.

Comrade Brian said:
No one is proven to be successful.

We can see what has worked in the past.

Ivan The Terrible said:
The United States has never been a true capitalist society! How did we see it fail?


This garbage about the US not capitalist belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Forum.

The US is not capitalist. The fact that the US has taxes makes it most definitely not pure capitalism.

The government traditionally tries to break up monopolies such as in electric utilities.

Farming, trucking, and airlines are very regulated by the government.

The Food and Drug Administration, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency are all government organizations that regulate business a lot.

The government controls the postal service, the armed forces, police, fire, and many other services which the people use.

Social security? Medicaid and medicare?

Comrade Brian, saying that the US is capitalist belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Forum.

fooligan said:
Socialism is a threat to any democracy because socialist governments are inherently iron-fisted when it comes to freedom. I.E. you have none.

Another misunderstanding.

Falangist said:
As for myself, my economic theory is largely national syndicalist, so I tend to be anti-socialist and anti-capitalist at the same time. I just don't think either is the answer.

I would agree.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
IE the majority of Indians were killed by disease accidently it was not intentional

Around 90% of the Native American Population was already dead from Spanish disease and warfare, before Jamestown or Plymouth were even ideas.

Falangist said:
As for myself, my economic theory is largely national syndicalist, so I tend to be anti-socialist and anti-capitalist at the same time. I just don't think either is the answer.


So you're a fascist.

That doesn't make sense. Realizing that both systems put into their purest forms fail is far from fascism.
 

Volker

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
6,592
Reaction score
141
Location
Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
-Demosthenes- said:
That doesn't make sense. Realizing that both systems put into their purest forms fail is far from fascism.
National Syndicalism is the ideology of Falangists, and Falange is a form of Fascism.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
-Demosthenes- said:
Around 90% of the Native American Population was already dead from Spanish disease and warfare, before Jamestown or Plymouth were even ideas.

Exactly the majority of the Indians were killed by the Spanish and the Portugese. The British had very little to do with it.

That doesn't make sense. Realizing that both systems put into their purest forms fail is far from fascism.

Yes it does national syndicalism is a fascist ideology which was practiced in Franco's Spain. It's not racist fascism but it's fascism none the less. Look at his avatar.
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Volker said:
National Syndicalism is the ideology of Falangists, and Falange is a form of Fascism.

What does that have to do with the fact that pure capitalism nor pure socialism can work very well?

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Yes it does national syndicalism is a fascist ideology which was practiced in Franco's Spain. It's not racist fascism but it's fascism none the less. Look at his avatar.

Did I misinterpret what he said?
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
-Demosthenes- said:
What does that have to do with the fact that pure capitalism nor pure socialism can work very well?



Did I misinterpret what he said?

What he said is that capitalism and communism are both bad because he's a fascist. Allthough I am still of the firm belief that Fascism is indeed a socialist ideology.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Red_Dave said:
The problem with your argument about economic freedom is that capatalism argueably does not give people economic freedom. Under capatalim the economy is controlled by the leadership of corporations which are run for the benefit of the rich. The way in which the economy is controlled by a minority is undemocratic and creates a lack of economic and personal freedom in the lives of many people. Under socialism resources can be controlled by the people [Through the ballot box and other methods to varrying degrees, depending on the type of socialism] So in this sence socialism can be more democratic when it gives people the freedom to control the resources and buissnesses that have a major effect on there lives.

I happen to like corporations, it makes it easier for me to return sh!t. Seriuolsy though those evil corporations producing goods that people want to buy for affordable prices and employing all those poor oppressed workers so that they can feed their families. God when will it end. :roll: Socialism takes the power of property out of the hands of the individual where it belongs and places it in the hands of the state which history has proven is only good at fuc/king up the economy not at fixing it. I have come to the realization that, because of the harm that unchecked corporate power can have on the society as a whole, a small measure of regulation is a necessity, but wealth redistribution is another matter altogether and let's not kid ourselves, because that is precisely what you're really talking about here now isn't it? The state should only have one function when it comes to the economy (two if you count the environment) and that is to stop monopolies from forming due to the fact that competition is the engine that drives the economy.

"The socialists view of the economy: if it moves tax it, if it keeps moving regulate it, if it stops moving subsidize it." -- Ronald Reagan
 
Last edited:

Volker

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
6,592
Reaction score
141
Location
Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
-Demosthenes- said:
What does that have to do with the fact that pure capitalism nor pure socialism can work very well?
Nothing, but if you read the whole sentence, you see, he supports national syndicalism.
 

Falangist

New member
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
To clear things up, yes I am a falangist, and my avatar is Engelbert Dollfuss. Fascism it is, but I am not racist. Nazism and fascism don't mix even though Hitler and Mussolini were allies.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Falangist said:
To clear things up, yes I am a falangist, and my avatar is Engelbert Dollfuss. Fascism it is, but I am not racist. Nazism and fascism don't mix even though Hitler and Mussolini were allies.

As long as you don't start spewing crap about racial purity and aryan brotherhood then I won't put you in the same category as the nazis, however, for the record everything you think and say is wrong and I am going to place you in the same category as the socialists on this forum: (misguided but not inherently evil). A begrudging welcome to DP you'll be seeing alot of me.
 

Falangist

New member
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
And you will be seeing a good lot of me my anarchic friend. It is too bad there is no chatroom because we could really go at it.
 
Top Bottom