New generations are not reading history, and so are not learning about the destruction and poverty, the massive famines and gulags and repression of socialism that some generations before them knew very well. It´s sad to see a resurgence of dogmatic socialist principles. People seem to blame free markets and capitalism for all their problems, but are keen to ignore the tragedy socialism represented in the history of humanity.
that is why in socialist china workers earns 4$, while in US 7.5$ per hour, while having 5 times bigger costs and not healthcare... oh in denmark minimum is 35 net per hour
No. The issue is that the conservative right conflates socialism with communism. Examine the CCF party in Canadian history to see a bastion of fiscal responsibility (17 consecutive surplus budgets) that also laid the foundation for public insurance (still cheaper than private insurers in other provinces), utilities, and services. They were devout social democrats who supported a planned economy. They rose from grass roots in an agricultural region in the midst of the great depression and saved the agricultural sector by offering affordable crop insurance and social services including, but not limited to, public healthcare. Proper critique requires engaging with the strengths of another viewpoint, not just its weaknesses.
@@dissident306 You did not do your homework. Socialism can only be sustained in the long-term by a communist government. Otherwise the economy goes bankrupt shortly after burning through the reserve of goods stockpiled before the switch to socialism. This is a learning from as far as XIX-th century already not to mention the lessons of the XX-th. Even Karl Marx knew it very well. Actually this is his crucial contribution to the doctrine, which Lenin took from him. That is why Marx openly despised and fiercely fought with reformist socialists (see the "Manifest of the Communist Party" 1848) and he held the indisputable dogma of the necessity of an armed revolution - to create the terror appartatus required to keep the system alive despite unavoidable social unrest when poverty begins. Btw, the Soviet Bolshevik party was called social-democratic before the Revolution and everyone was using the term "socialism" back then.
@@ianssbus186 Bullshit statistics. What matters for an individual worker - the GNI PPP per capita - is stll just ~28% of US, slightly lower than in Mexico. This is purchasing power adjusted hence incorporates all the living costs. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita
@@kojak8403 Actually, I've done an Honours degree on the subject. Have you looked, at all, at the party I identified? They took power during a recession - there was no surplus - and I identified their fiscal responsibility above. Their spending came from providing public services at a lower cost than the private market of the day was willing to allow. The CCF was at the forefront of the Progressive movement in Canada. Try Lipsett's, Agrarian Socialism for a contemporary analysis.
I am taken with the idea of Socialism being very like ones family, in the mind of our young. The Adults decide for the children, they also give up much to give to there family most of their time and wealth. Fairness is attempted and very little evil is the experience of most. As they are still being cared for and helped to make good decisions, they feel comfortable in thinking of Government as just another Family. The idea of the unfreedom of childhood never occurs to these children. Earlier children were working and on their own much earlier. So, they had already accepted the realities of the world, and were able to accept the rigor of Freedom.
@Doug Miles I would not say that socialism works in Scandinavia. It functions, but for the price of fast-paced demolition of society by atomization of communities, destruction of family ties, loosening work ethics and eradication of indigenous culture by replacing it with ethnically and religiously alien immigration's. This is the true face of Sweden (shot by a leftist, mind you): ruclips.net/video/CfyKYeaZcIM/видео.html
Isn’t it ingrained into the theory of capital in general, to seek ways to circumvent or at least divert prevailing systems of profit? Are socialists the greatest capitalists in this regard?
MK, your comment does not even rise to the "too clever by half" low-bar; actually, far below. In the meantime, putting aside your facile attempt at sarcasm, it's apparent that you do not understand first principle distinctions between capitalism --- an economic system --- and socialism --- primarily a govt type.
@@johnk2452 When socialism was born it was concerned with distribution of wealth - i.e. it was economic from its historical inception roots: Babeuf, Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen and others. It was post-factum named utopian socialism by Marx and others. What became apparent soon is that this system is only able to function in the long-term when enforced by state power (and terror), whereas capitalism as closer to human nature can function freely under wider array of government types, unfortunately even under tyranny, like the current Chinese Staatskapitalismus (term as derived from Engels/Trocki).
@Doug Miles Many libtards suffer from this condition. There are quite a few in my own family...!!! They've abandoned logic, reason, and effort, as if by choice.
@@ThePayola123 What you perceive as some zombie-forming spectacle born by abandonment of logic does not really happen by choice. It's perfidious Marxist indoctrination, which begins by destroying the ability to think logically, articulate own interest or defend an independent thought - and finally these cease to exist in an individual processed like that. This was all mastered and codified by Marxist academia throughout decades. The narrow far-left radical elites really got to know how human culture, society and psychology works, and are actively using this knowledge to dismantle the society and overpower whatever sanity is left in the majority - and they are succeeding at that, because they found proper tools. This all began with freudomarxism and later infected sociology and all humanistic areas, esp. education. If we want our families (esp. future generations) to stand any chance against this well-oiled machine we need to learn precisely how it works. And all this is completely logical and explicable. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudo-Marxism The worst evil Marxist geniuses were: Horkheimer (Critical theory, "Critique of instrumental reason") - disabling rationality in culture and academia, removal of the notion of truth Habermas ("Ethics of discourse") - disabling opposition in public debates/discourse, esp. academia Adorno (Critical pedagogy) - indoctrination (as young as possible) to turn youth into forces destroying capitalist society Fromm - adapting Reich's sexual revolution ideas into Marxism as a force destroying norms, identities and eventually whole capitalist societies Marcuse ("Repressive tolerance") - codification and justification of political correctness as revolutionary force (minority dictatorship)
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
New generations are not reading history, and so are not learning about the destruction and poverty, the massive famines and gulags and repression of socialism that some generations before them knew very well. It´s sad to see a resurgence of dogmatic socialist principles. People seem to blame free markets and capitalism for all their problems, but are keen to ignore the tragedy socialism represented in the history of humanity.
that is why in socialist china workers earns 4$, while in US 7.5$ per hour, while having 5 times bigger costs and not healthcare... oh in denmark minimum is 35 net per hour
No. The issue is that the conservative right conflates socialism with communism. Examine the CCF party in Canadian history to see a bastion of fiscal responsibility (17 consecutive surplus budgets) that also laid the foundation for public insurance (still cheaper than private insurers in other provinces), utilities, and services. They were devout social democrats who supported a planned economy. They rose from grass roots in an agricultural region in the midst of the great depression and saved the agricultural sector by offering affordable crop insurance and social services including, but not limited to, public healthcare. Proper critique requires engaging with the strengths of another viewpoint, not just its weaknesses.
@@dissident306 You did not do your homework. Socialism can only be sustained in the long-term by a communist government. Otherwise the economy goes bankrupt shortly after burning through the reserve of goods stockpiled before the switch to socialism. This is a learning from as far as XIX-th century already not to mention the lessons of the XX-th. Even Karl Marx knew it very well. Actually this is his crucial contribution to the doctrine, which Lenin took from him. That is why Marx openly despised and fiercely fought with reformist socialists (see the "Manifest of the Communist Party" 1848) and he held the indisputable dogma of the necessity of an armed revolution - to create the terror appartatus required to keep the system alive despite unavoidable social unrest when poverty begins. Btw, the Soviet Bolshevik party was called social-democratic before the Revolution and everyone was using the term "socialism" back then.
@@ianssbus186 Bullshit statistics. What matters for an individual worker - the GNI PPP per capita - is stll just ~28% of US, slightly lower than in Mexico. This is purchasing power adjusted hence incorporates all the living costs.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita
@@kojak8403 Actually, I've done an Honours degree on the subject. Have you looked, at all, at the party I identified? They took power during a recession - there was no surplus - and I identified their fiscal responsibility above. Their spending came from providing public services at a lower cost than the private market of the day was willing to allow. The CCF was at the forefront of the Progressive movement in Canada. Try Lipsett's, Agrarian Socialism for a contemporary analysis.
I am taken with the idea of Socialism being very like ones family, in the mind of our young. The Adults decide for the children, they also give up much to give to there family most of their time and wealth. Fairness is attempted and very little evil is the experience of most. As they are still being cared for and helped to make good decisions, they feel comfortable in thinking of Government as just another Family. The idea of the unfreedom of childhood never occurs to these children. Earlier children were working and on their own much earlier. So, they had already accepted the realities of the world, and were able to accept the rigor of Freedom.
@Doug Miles I would not say that socialism works in Scandinavia. It functions, but for the price of fast-paced demolition of society by atomization of communities, destruction of family ties, loosening work ethics and eradication of indigenous culture by replacing it with ethnically and religiously alien immigration's.
This is the true face of Sweden (shot by a leftist, mind you): ruclips.net/video/CfyKYeaZcIM/видео.html
Isn’t it ingrained into the theory of capital in general, to seek ways to circumvent or at least divert prevailing systems of profit? Are socialists the greatest capitalists in this regard?
MK, your comment does not even rise to the "too clever by half" low-bar; actually, far below. In the meantime, putting aside your facile attempt at sarcasm, it's apparent that you do not understand first principle distinctions between capitalism --- an economic system --- and socialism --- primarily a govt type.
Johnny Cuyana well that’s the whole argument in a nutshell isn’t it? Or are you suggesting capitalism has no significance in government?
@@johnk2452 When socialism was born it was concerned with distribution of wealth - i.e. it was economic from its historical inception roots: Babeuf, Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen and others. It was post-factum named utopian socialism by Marx and others. What became apparent soon is that this system is only able to function in the long-term when enforced by state power (and terror), whereas capitalism as closer to human nature can function freely under wider array of government types, unfortunately even under tyranny, like the current Chinese Staatskapitalismus (term as derived from Engels/Trocki).
Just where did they find this dinosaur...???
@Doug Miles
What about the deliberately incapacitated...???
@Doug Miles
Many libtards suffer from this condition. There are quite a few in my own family...!!! They've abandoned logic, reason, and effort, as if by choice.
@@ThePayola123 What you perceive as some zombie-forming spectacle born by abandonment of logic does not really happen by choice. It's perfidious Marxist indoctrination, which begins by destroying the ability to think logically, articulate own interest or defend an independent thought - and finally these cease to exist in an individual processed like that. This was all mastered and codified by Marxist academia throughout decades. The narrow far-left radical elites really got to know how human culture, society and psychology works, and are actively using this knowledge to dismantle the society and overpower whatever sanity is left in the majority - and they are succeeding at that, because they found proper tools. This all began with freudomarxism and later infected sociology and all humanistic areas, esp. education. If we want our families (esp. future generations) to stand any chance against this well-oiled machine we need to learn precisely how it works. And all this is completely logical and explicable.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudo-Marxism
The worst evil Marxist geniuses were:
Horkheimer (Critical theory, "Critique of instrumental reason") - disabling rationality in culture and academia, removal of the notion of truth
Habermas ("Ethics of discourse") - disabling opposition in public debates/discourse, esp. academia
Adorno (Critical pedagogy) - indoctrination (as young as possible) to turn youth into forces destroying capitalist society
Fromm - adapting Reich's sexual revolution ideas into Marxism as a force destroying norms, identities and eventually whole capitalist societies
Marcuse ("Repressive tolerance") - codification and justification of political correctness as revolutionary force (minority dictatorship)