Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe it's because you're mislabeling people. Most people on the left are not socialists; they support having some socialist aspects in the economy. Most conservatives also support some socialist programs. Medicaid, Social Security, public funding of roads, etc. are forms of socialism. Any time people pool their resources together to make something happen, it's socialism.
You can have socialism at the neighborhood level. Make neighborhoods fund their own police forces. Or, you can have socialism at the municipal level and make everyone pay taxes to fund the city's police department.
Socialism is an economic system. Communism is a form of government. You can't use the two interchangeably. There are several Democratic Socialist countries in Europe that are more well off than the U.S.
Good post, but I have to comment: both socialism and communism are economic systems. Totalitarianism is a political system. Here's an excerpt from one definition:
Quote:
Communism is thus a form of socialism—a higher and more advanced form, according to its advocates. Exactly how communism differs from socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists’ adherence to the revolutionary socialism of Karl Marx.
Like most writers of the 19th century, Marx tended to use the terms communism and socialism interchangeably.
The USSR did not consider itself "communist", but a socialist work-in-progress, working toward communism as the eventual goal. In Eastern Europe, the workers didn't own the means of production; the State did. In that sense, one could speculate that the system was actually Statist capitalism (vs. private corporate capitalism, as we have in the West).
I'd like to know what examples of "Leftists" promising a "socialist/communist utopia", but failing to deliver once they're in power, tyger has in mind. His statement may actually make sense, depending on what example/s he has in mind.
Good post, but I have to comment: both socialism and communism are economic systems. Totalitarianism is a political system. Here's an excerpt from one definition:
The USSR did not consider itself "communist", but a socialist work-in-progress, working toward communism as the eventual goal. In Eastern Europe, the workers didn't own the means of production; the State did. In that sense, one could speculate that the system was actually Statist capitalism (vs. private corporate capitalism, as we have in the West).
I'd like to know what examples of "Leftists" promising a "socialist/communist utopia", but failing to deliver once they're in power, tyger has in mind. His statement may actually make sense, depending on what example/s he has in mind.
I recommend reading the whole page. Communism is a form of government/political system, as mentioned in the reference you didn't link to, that uses socialism as its economic system. Communism cannot be had without changing the form of government. The idea of socialism predates Karl Marx and doesn't require a change in governing style.
When parts of Spain had virtual anarchy during the Spanish Civil War, there was socialism in these communities.
Last edited by L210; 06-02-2018 at 12:04 PM..
06-02-2018, 12:53 PM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
There's really no point in discussing precisely what communism, socialism, etc. are. It doesn't matter. Those are just generic terms for "something I disagree with." The fear is not being indoctrinated into communist thought or whatever ridiculous position these people claim to be opposed to. The real issue is that they never want to be exposed to someone who doesn't think exactly like them, and they never want to have to confront an inconvenient fact.
There are indeed very limited higher education options for people who never, ever want to have their fantasy world challenged.
There's really no point in discussing precisely what communism, socialism, etc. are. It doesn't matter. Those are just generic terms for "something I disagree with." The fear is not being indoctrinated into communist thought or whatever ridiculous position these people claim to be opposed to. The real issue is that they never want to be exposed to someone who doesn't think exactly like them, and they never want to have to confront an inconvenient fact.
There are indeed very limited higher education options for people who never, ever want to have their fantasy world challenged.
Most who do a lot of kneejerk hurling of "That's socialist!" "That's communist!" really are ill-informed as to what it actually means to hold socialist viewpoints, or what communism actually is. It becomes apparent from context when you probe deeper than the kneejerk.
The OP is talking about SJW, marxist, socialist-studies courses, not general history, literature, and social studies requirements, many of them can be aligned with your concentration. MIT does not force you to take women's study or marxism 101. OP talks about going to grad school, MIT will prepare him for grad school and beyond, unless you feel like your school does better in cranking out mathematicians?
What schools force a student to take Women's Studies? Or Marxism 101?
Maybe you can find a school that does that. Maybe. The notion that it's hard to find a school where you can't graduate without taking Women's Studies or Marxism is complete and total nonsense.
My wife - an atheist - completed her degree at a Catholic university. She didn't have a tantrum because the graduation requirements included a couple of religion classes. She didn't need a safe space.
There's really no point in discussing precisely what communism, socialism, etc. are. It doesn't matter. Those are just generic terms for "something I disagree with." The fear is not being indoctrinated into communist thought or whatever ridiculous position these people claim to be opposed to. The real issue is that they never want to be exposed to someone who doesn't think exactly like them, and they never want to have to confront an inconvenient fact.
There are indeed very limited higher education options for people who never, ever want to have their fantasy world challenged.
And that is exactly wrong, which is why so many of these discussions are doomed to failure. That type of answer is an easy cop out; a way to dismiss anyone who disagrees without attempting to actually address the disagreement. The fear is NOT being exposed to other thought in an intellectual, need to understand sense, but rather the fear is a mixture of being forced to parrot only those answers that are "acceptable" or face significant grade impacts or constant subtle pressure to conform to only those beliefs that are "acceptable." And yes, I've had professors who did that in English and History courses.
And the reason people worry more about Liberal Arts courses isn't because of the word "liberal" in it (that's just another cop out way to dismiss their concerns), but because Liberal Arts are far more subjective and allow much more room for teaching only the "acceptable" set of beliefs. Much harder to twist F=dp/dt into a political belief.
I recommend reading the whole page. Communism is a form of government/political system, as mentioned in the reference you didn't link to, that uses socialism as its economic system. Communism cannot be had without changing the form of government. The idea of socialism predates Karl Marx and doesn't require a change in governing style.
When parts of Spain had virtual anarchy during the Spanish Civil War, there was socialism in these communities.
The bolded is not what the link says. Why can't communism be had without changing the form of government? Anyway, this is a topic that needs its own thread, though I'm not sure which sub-forum it should go in. If you can figure out where to put it, I'd be happy to continue discussing with you. . I don't want to get booted off this thread for off-topic.
Only partially true. Most public universities have leftist, Marxist, feminist, SJW ideology spewing professors, even in classes unrelated to those subject matters. In a Climate class, the professor refused to draw Florida on maps because of the Gore/Bush 2000 election controversy (I was in undergrad during the GW Bush presidency). In English 102, the professor also taught women's studies and I ran into some ideological issues with her due to my more traditionally masculine perspectives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenHair
Bob Jones is a religious university. I DO NOT want a religious environment.
At a religious university, one is less likely to get Marxist, feminist, leftist, SJW nonsense,
University of Notre Dame's longtime past president, Father Hesburgh, was well known for his devotion and work in civil rights.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I don't want to get booted off this thread for off-topic.
