• 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!

Socialist? Marxist?

I wonder if the people who throw around words like Marxist and socialist can actually define them or are they quoting Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, or Limbaugh. Why do people have to resort to name calling and scare tactics instead of serious, respectful debate on issues? Oh wait, I know, because in a serious, respectful debate based on fact, they have nothing.
 
Click to expand...
The same can be said for people who use the terms "Nazi" and "Fascist." It is unfortunate either way.
 
The other issue is those who claim they know what Socialism or Marxism is, there's someone who defines it differently. The definition is a moving target depending on the ideology of the others discussing it. The bottom line is, most of us know what we know by reading a book. Few have lived under or experience a pure form of either in actual application. Therefore it's up to how one interprets what they read. Nothing is ever pure - it's always polluted, therefore no one really knows what their talking about.
 
Nah, they use that as a swearword.
 
Layla, you are quite correct in your analysis.
 
Layla,
When someone suggests the "re-distrubution of wealth", taking from those that have "EARNED" it and giving to those who have not earned it and doing so by means of force or by implementing a law not accepted by the "Majority" I liken that to Socialism or Marxism.....the quote is "Socialism is fine, until you run out of other peoples money" Karl Marx said "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." that is a true Marxist statement & also fits the current thinking of the current Administration.
 
socialism is the political beliefes that industry should be state, or collectivly owned (i.e. GM, Healthcare, ect.) in order to maxamise the use of products not the trade value of such products, with distribution of surplus as the state sees fit.

Marxism is basically the opposite of capitalism, where instead of one attempting to reach the "American Dream" and possibly failing possible achieving their goal, Marxism says that everyone must do a "fair" share of the work and earn a "fair" share of the wealth.

"Communism evolves from socialism out of this progression: the socialist slogan is “From each according to his ability, to each according to his work.” The communist slogan varies thusly: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” "

This is what progressives are all about. Slowly launching the last truly free society into a socialist and later a Marxist society, even though neither have ever succeeded in history. Even in Europe, one of the requirements for Greece to receive a bailout is for Greece to lose its socialized healthcare.(the irony)

Everyone should read "Animal Farm"
 
Last edited:
You know Layla, it really doesn't matter how precise you define these terms. The end result is the issue....it's all about the end result, and the motive and ideology of the people who want to strip others of their natural liberties. Mincing words over the definitions is really irrelevant. So what if we've never really had communism; we all know its impossible due to the greedy, selfish nature of mankind. What always results is a totalitarian regime that oppresses even the thoughts of men in order to maintain its control. No, definitions are nothing but smoke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom