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.
Communism is just the PC way of saying fascism... the people who argue for Communism actually want a Fascist hierarchy.... they just don’t want to admit that they are fascists... I never met a true communist, they have all been fascists hiding in communist ideals...
/Thread. Except substitute Progressive for either one.
I've heard both words mentioned a lot (usually one group calling the other side one of the terms). I know that both are Big Government anti-liberty systems, but what exactly is the difference?
I mean, we have heard of classical examples of fascists (Adolf Hitler (Germany), Benito Mussolini (Italy), Francisco Franco (Spain)) and, possibly, Vladmir Putin (Russia), and communism (Joseph Stalin (Russia/USSR), Mao (China), Fidel Castro (Cuba) and Kim Jun Un (North Korea)).
From William Graham Sumner “What Social Classes Owe to Each Other” – first published 1883 but still in print:
“There is a plain tendency in all civilized governments toward plutocracy. A plutocracy would be a civil organization in which the power resides in wealth, in which a man could have whatever he could buy, in which the rights, interests and feelings of those who could not pay would be overridden. The old constitutional guarantees were all aimed against kings and nobles. New ones must be invented to hold the power of wealth to that responsibility without which no power whatever is consistent with liberty. Nowhere in the world is the danger of plutocracy as formidable as it is here (in the United States).”
Socialism is not communism. In practice, as in western Europe between WW2 and 1980, socialism allowed considerable private ownership of land, businesses, etc., but kept key industries either in government hands or heavily regulated (especially coal, heavy industry, mass transportation, utilities). Retail outlets, farms, forest land, and fisheries and fishing boats definitely remained in private hands.
Europe has moved away from socialism in that sense and moved toward Social Democracy (all wealth-making properties remain in private hands, but people - esp consumer goods and wealthy individuals - are taxed at fairly high rates in order to fund key services widely regarded as a human right in addition to infrastructure, defense, and law enforcement). This is the position that Bernie Sanders seems to hold and (to a lesser degree) the Clintons.
Democratic socialism is just a bunch of wolves and a few sheep vote to decide what is for dinner.
Just because some people voted, it does NOT make it in any way moral, just for fair.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,600,682 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer
Democratic socialism is just a bunch of wolves and a few sheep vote to decide what is for dinner.
Oh? I thought that's what was said about democracy, and even representative republics. "We the people" have proved we can be as evil and oppressive as any government policy can be.
Of course, both can have safeguards to protect the rights of the minority from the tyrrany of the majority. But both Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism also have safeguards against letting the majority run rampant over a minority, contrary to what you claim. They don't allow the majority decide whether due process may be denied to the minority. Nor do they allow warrentless searches of the minority or their premises or possessions. Nor do deny the minority the right to vote. Nor the right to peak into ballot boxes to see who voted for the loser in the election. They also can't allow others to print libel and slander against the minority. Yadda Yadda Yadda, you get the point.
We have been a Fascist Nation, since 1913. About the same time other advanced nations were experimenting in Socialism, from the teachings of Marx. Because people would freakout if they came right out and called it Communism, they named it Progressivism. Progress. When in all reality, it is very regressive, back to being controlled. Freedom & Liberty have no place in a Communist/Progressive society.
Communism isn't racist?! I think the ethnic groups that Stalin had wiped out might disagree with you!
The lack of knowledge about socialism and communism is PROFOUND.
But since Fox News, Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, Limbaugh et al keep floating the terms interchangeably - no wonder few know or even care about the differences.
Every post except two above even come close to the differentiation between the two.
Well, fascism is on the extreme right, and communism is the extreme left.
I'm thinking that perhaps one difference might be that communism in it's ideal state isn't such a bad idea, based on community rather than personal property. Bernie's ideas, though maybe unrealistic, aren't bad. But I don't see how fascism could be anything but bad. Here's one definition: Centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
Well, fascism is on the extreme right, and communism is the extreme left.
I'm thinking that perhaps one difference might be that communism in it's ideal state isn't such a bad idea, based on community rather than personal property. Bernie's ideas, though maybe unrealistic, aren't bad. But I don't see how fascism could be anything but bad. Here's one definition: Centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
The lack of knowledge about socialism and communism is PROFOUND.
But since Fox News, Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, Limbaugh et al keep floating the terms interchangeably - no wonder few know or even care about the differences.
Every post except two above even come close to the differentiation between the two.
The dictionary must be fake information.
Spot on. Most of the drivel in this thread is utter nonsense. Makes you wonder why one would post something contrary to the well known and defined political orthodoxies.
Mind blowing how simple and misguided some are.
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.
