Truth To Power wrote:It's a description of my statements.
You are emotionally describing how you feel your economics are, but you're not giving any characteristics of your ideal economy. It is like asking what car do you drive, and you respond, "my car is the truth and it is correct."
You are being absurd.
You are still avoiding politics.
Sure I am: production based on secure individual rights to life, liberty, property in the fruits of one's labor, and consensual exchange.
And how would your ideal economy help people reach that? What characteristics would be there?
The company is still not the state, which proves your claim false.
But the state is protecting the capitalist rights of the ruling monopoly, and the state is conserving the capitalist mode of production.
I proved your point was wrong.
You proving anything isn't political. And you didn't prove that I am "wrong" because this is a political forum, not a truth or lie forum.
But socialism IS ignorance and false consciousness, if not always religious oppression.
Socialism liberates the hearts and the minds of everyone who has real consciousness. You stating that a type of economy is "ignorant" is not political, it's an emotional rant.
Which should be attacked: those who take advantage of ("exploit") victims of oppression, or the oppressors? If a sociopathic criminal goes around beating people up, and a doctor charges them the market rate for treating their injuries, thus earning a handsome living for himself, socialists think it is the doctor who is the problem and should be attacked, not the sociopath.
In your example, both the doctor and the criminal, because the doctor helped the criminal be a criminal by putting him in the position of being a criminal by mandating higher testosterone, unrecognized domestic abuse, and the love of money, all of which would be absent in socialism because they do not need to exist in socialism.
Your example is not what socialists see. It is what anarchists see. And anarchists are not socialists.
LOL! You follow that prize fool, Karl Marx.
When did I ever claim to be a "Marxist" or a "Marxist Leninist?" I am not a "Marxist." I am a SCIENTIFIC SOCIALIST who supports some views of what Marx had. I could use Marx as a tool to go against social and economic oppression to the ignorant people who blindly support it like you.
False on all counts.
"True" or "false" are not political engagements. They are emotional rants.
It has political implications. Sorry if you can't understand that.
I can understand you. You can't understand me.
I have given a definition of evil and shown how it applies. You are just name calling.
Your views are evil. Because you are false.
Your questions are out of context. It's like asking a cat "why do radios fly?"
You are making a fool of yourself. Is that good?
What I view as good is not the same as what you view as good. This is because we have different politics, and WE ARE ON A POLITICAL FORUM.
Because it proves you wrong?
A dictionary that proves one wrong is a "good" one, thus making your statement incorrect because you haven't proved me wrong, so your dictionary is not "good."
What an eloquent self-refutation.
Your spouting non political rants.
I have indeed. And I believe them.
I am sure you do.
As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!"
Look who's talking!
It's pointless to make political claims as you do: i.e., without factual or logical support. Facts and logic have political implications. Too bad you can't understand that.
But what you feel is a fact, or what's logical or not shows your politics.
All you have done is give emotional rants that are out of context.