Do you think those countries would have had freedom if it was a Romanov tsar ruling those countries instead of a Soviet general secretary?
FL Gov. Ron DeSantis Signs Civics Bill Requiring Students to Learn Evils of ‘Communism, Totalitarian Ideologies’
- Thread starter windriverrange
- Start date
Show me where anyone in this thread has advocated czarist rule.
Were the Czechs poles and Bulgarians unfree because of Communism or because the were ruled by Russians with a political culture steeped in authoritarianism and autocracy?
A simple and honest question for you, Pilt. If memory serves people like Sean Penn were quite taken with the Venezuelan socialism of Chavez, and were not hesitant to label it as socialism. I seem to remember Bernie Sanders said some nice things about it, and I believe AOC waxed eloquent about the uplifting spirit that Venezuelan socialism was making everybody better off than before.
But now I’m pretty sure those early fans of Venezuelan socialism are somewhat reticent to say it is socialism.
Do you know or remember at what point in history Sanders and AOC, etc., began saying Venezuela isn’t real socialism, it was never real socialism when they cheered it on? And what happened with the Venezuelan experiment that made them change their mind?
I ask because I am of the firm belief that Venezuela is a perfect example of my contention that the definition of socialism
is amorphous, has no real meaning, it just means what the socialist says it means and only for as long as he says so. And it immediately ceases to fit his definition as soon as he changes his mind and moves on to another socialist experiment that he thinks shows promise.
I commend your consistent (so far) advocacy that Norway is “real socialism.” But you have hinted several times that a comparison of Norway to Venezuela is evidence that Venezuela isn’t real socialism. How on earth did Chavez and Maduro pull the wool over so many American socialist’s eyes?
I compare it to Venezuela to accentuate Norway's socialism not to reduce Venezuela's. Venezuela suffers from dutch disease and high leverage to oil prices. Maduro isn't half the leader Chavez is and that's a problem. The technocratic chops just aren't there for them to pull this off in the face of so many challenges.
Question for you: If Venezuela was by its very mature destined to fail why does the US sanction it and attempt coups and interfere with it constantly? Why not let it fail on its own terms and quit giving Maduro outsiders to blame everything on?
That’s an outstanding question. My answer may disappoint you. The US government is drunk with zeal to control the rest of the world. It has viewed socialist/communist governments as threats to its dominance. Interference in the affairs of foreign countries has become pathological. (It will be interesting to watch as our government slowly evolves into a socialist society in its own right to see if it softens its views on other socialist governments. I think probably not. Governments maintain their power by promising its citizens it will protect them from evil outside forces. Self preservation is priority numbers 1 through 10 with every government.)
I am an advocate of free societies. The only “real” economic theory that coincides with freedom is free market capitalism. It is ironic that a free society has tolerance for any group of people to operate their own socialist agenda. They just can’t force their agenda on those that don’t want it.
Command economies, IMO, from reading Hayek and other Austrian school economists, are destined for failure, it is inherent in their nature. So as for me I am against the American government interfering in the affairs of Venezuela - or even China, for that matter. I recognize a free society never has anything to fear from a command economy. They eventually collapse in on themselves as soon as, as Maggie Thatcher put it, they run out of other people’s money.
I think it is more nefarious than threat construction for the sake of self preservation, but we agree for the most part.
Oh, I agree there is way more involved than “threat construction.” That was just an oversimplified and edited version. My reply was too long as it was.
Political freedom and socialism?
you should spend some time studying history instead of searching for macrobullshiteconomics graphs
Can you think of a country that had a strong history and culture of political freedom and lost it due to socialism?
Why is Split still here? Move to a Socialist Country if you want one so bad. Should be easy enough to become a citizen of one, just tell them how much you love Socialism and want to prosper in a new land.
In the words of Heels up when she's not on her knees, root cause.
I am a patriot and the United States' destiny is the be the Vanguard standard bearer for socialism. You can leave when we succeed.
Ah.....I see the communism didn't work because it was in the wrong country argument is still alive and well.
It worked quite well in those countries, but you do have to grade on a curve.
Compare China Vs. India in 1945 and China Vs. India today.
Ahhhhh, yes, we must adjust for the times to try to make pilts socialism appear less bad. Good call. Tell us about how wonderful China is today.
Meh. I think I’ll just settle for the vulgar degree of wealth that my education, work ethic, and the USA’s free enterprise system has enabled me to achieve.
Socialism: Because we’ll make your country less of a shithole.
Don’t take that one to Madison Ave.
Also, how is that relevant to someone like me who doesn’t live in a shithole, has never lived in a shithole, and never will?
If it helps a shithole be less shit it could help an already great country become great
Work ethic is what breeds greatness. Socialism breeds neither.
It is Seattle (or any other blue metro) under Marxist or socialist control
Capitalism does the same thing, and with lower taxes.
That’s a concept of socialism with which I am unfamiliar. Could you expand your answer? I am of the understanding that the goal of socialism is ultimately to have equal outcomes. How do outcomes equalize if a hard worker achieves greater prosperity than an indifferent worker?
