[ArthurTandy1]

https://www.hoover.org/research/sociali ... led-period

The authors reviewed numerous nations that tried socialism or Communism. Socialism is an economic system, while Communist is the name of a political party.
The only 3 nations that still have Communism/socialism are North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.

Socialism sounds good in theory, but it does not work in the real world.
Many nations have a welfare state, but that is not socialism because they still allow private ownership of industry and stores.

[XogGyux]

LOL someone is butthurt. What a sad trumpist =(

[ArthurTandy1]

LOL someone is butthurt. What a sad trumpist =(

Why did you climb out of the grave, Ludwig?

[Godstud]

You haven't a clue what Socialism is. The authors are heavily biased and it's a right-wingnut site.

Socialism
political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

I highlighted the part that the truly ignorant usually miss, or completely ignore.

Not every ideology theory has to be taken to the extreme to work. Even Capitalism requires checks and balances.

The only 3 nations that still have Communism/socialism are North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.

Patently false. China has a Communist government but a capitalist economy.

Laos and Vietnam are Communist nations, with capitalist economies.

Socialism sounds good in theory, but it does not work in the real world.

Nope. Denmark and a great many countries have socialist policies. They are not welfare states, either, with a quality of life AND freedoms often surpassing that of the USA.

Socialism works fine alongside capitalism. Neither needs to be taken to the extreme.

China has private ownership. Ownership rights are protected under Article 39 of The Property Law of the People's Republic of China, which gives the owner the right to possess, utilize, dispose of and obtain profits from the real property.

As is evidenced by your statement, you haven't a clue what socialism is. I'd suggest trying to read and actually comprehend what it is before making ridiculous comments.

[XogGyux]

Why did you climb out of the grave, Ludwig?

To keep a close eye on annoying trolls like you

[ArthurTandy1]

https://www.hoover.org/research/socialism-has-failed-period

The authors reviewed numerous nations that tried socialism or Communism. Socialism is an economic system, while Communist is the name of a political party.
The only 3 nations that still have Communism/socialism are North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.

Socialism sounds good in theory, but it does not work in the real world.
Many nations have a welfare state, but that is not socialism because they still allow private ownership of industry and stores.

Socialism is, broadly speaking, a political and economic system in which property and the means of production are owned in common, typically controlled by the state or government. Socialism is based on the idea that common or public ownership of resources and means of production leads to a more equal society.Apr 2, 2021

Socialism | National Geographic Societyhttps://www.nationalgeographic.org › encyclopedia › soci...

[wat0n]

The funny thing is that countries like France or the Nordics were regarded as capitalist back in the Cold War, not socialist.

[Godstud]

@wat0n They still are. It's idiots who don't actually understand or have a clue about Socialism, who keep ranting about it.

It's the same kind of idiots who though Communism was going to take over the world, and so started unnecessary wars like in Vietnam. Vietnam still chose to become Communist, as did Laos.

@ArthurTandy1 You keep trying to find a version of the definition that says what you want it to day, but still doesn't. What you posted isn't any different from the definition I posted, and yet you still don't understand it.

[ArthurTandy1]

Socialism is, broadly speaking, a political and economic system in which property and the means of production are owned in common, typically controlled by the state or government. Socialism is based on the idea that common or public ownership of resources and means of production leads to a more equal society.Apr 2, 2021

Socialism | National Geographic Societyhttps://www.nationalgeographic.org › encyclopedia › soci...

socialism | Definition, History, Types, Examples, & Factshttps://www.britannica.com › topic › socialism
Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources.

[Godstud]

You don't understand what you are posting. it doesn't say what you WANT it to say.


From your definition:
or control of property and natural resources.

That doesn't necessarily mean that private ownership doesn't exist.

Norway has public control of some of its natural resources and it benefits greatly from this, while not being a Socialist country" by strict definition.

You are attempting to make an argument by definition, but are failing, miserably. Societies don't tend to be one or the other, but oft times somewhere in the middle. Even the USA benefits from some services being "socialist", like Fire and police departments.

[ArthurTandy1]

socialism | Definition, History, Types, Examples, & Factshttps://www.britannica.com › topic › socialism
Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources.

socialism
DefineRelateListDiscussSeeHearLove
Definitions
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
noun Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

[Godstud]

Still not saying what you WANT it to say. It's not as cut and dried as you like to pretend.

You are arguing semantics, and poorly, at that.

[ArthurTandy1]

@wat0n They still are. It's idiots who don't actually understand or have a clue about Socialism, who keep ranting about it.

It's the same kind of idiots who though Communism was going to take over the world, and so started unnecessary wars like in Vietnam. Vietnam still chose to become Communist, as did Laos.

@ArthurTandy1 You keep trying to find a version of the definition that says what you want it to day, but still doesn't. What you posted isn't any different from the definition I posted, and yet you still don't understand it.

Keep talking. You are discrediting yourself with bullshit and irrelevant crap.

[pugsville]

https://www.hoover.org/research/socialism-has-failed-period

The authors reviewed numerous nations that tried socialism or Communism. Socialism is an economic system, while Communist is the name of a political party.
The only 3 nations that still have Communism/socialism are North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.

Socialism sounds good in theory, but it does not work in the real world.
Many nations have a welfare state, but that is not socialism because they still allow private ownership of industry and stores.

Right wing cook think tanks incapable of lying straight, Desperate idiots whose policies have repeatedly failed in the real world.

Capitalism has also failed., it does not work in the real world. Repeatedly it has required Government intervention to save it.

These people write their conclusions then find reasons why the rich screwing the poor is somehow better for everyone including the poor.

Kept your shoddy propaganda.

[pugsville]

socialism
DefineRelateListDiscussSeeHearLove
Definitions
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
noun Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Get a better dictionary. Seesh,

[Godstud]

@ArthurTandy1 So explain why you think Denmark is Socialist. Then explain the difference between China and Denmark. Both are fueled by capitalist economies but have differing degrees of socialist control.

...or, are you are discrediting yourself with bullshit and irrelevant crap? You're the one simply spamming definitions you can find from every right-wing source you can find.

[ckaihatsu]

Socialism works fine alongside capitalism. Neither needs to be taken to the extreme.

Too late.

Vish • 10 hours ago • edited

The New York Times is perpetuating a Limited Hangout, disguised as an expose on American war crimes.

A Limited Hangout is a favored American disinformation tactic, whereby one admits a lesser crime only to cover up a greater crime.

In this case, the Times admits that America murdered some civilians in Syria and Iraq--but only that these murders were committed by some lower-level patsies (or "rogue junior-level officers" to use American NewSpeak).

What the New York Times does not want to admit, however, is the criminality of America's war against Syria (and Iraq) in general, which are based on massive lies that the American media as an institution all have promoted for years to this very day.

Even more shocking is that America and its allies like the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have been covertly sponsoring the very same Islamic terrorists--including Al-Queda affiliates and ISIS--that the USA claims to be fighting.

Needless to say, these greater deceptions and crimes continue to be promoted by the self-styled Newspaper of Record itself, the New York Times.

US greenlights missiles for al-Qaeda-linked, Turkish-backed Salafi-jihadists occupying Syria’s Idlib
https://thegrayzone.com/2019/05/31/us-m ... ria-idlib/

Former hostage responds to top diplomat calling Al Qaeda a US ‘asset’ in Syria
https://thegrayzone.com/2021/04/11/form ... -in-syria/

How Washington is positioning Syrian Al-Qaeda’s founder as its ‘asset’
https://thegrayzone.com/2021/06/09/wash ... ani-asset/

http://disq.us/p/2lcdmes

[Unthinking Majority]

https://www.hoover.org/research/socialism-has-failed-period

The authors reviewed numerous nations that tried socialism or Communism. Socialism is an economic system, while Communist is the name of a political party.
The only 3 nations that still have Communism/socialism are North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.

Socialism sounds good in theory, but it does not work in the real world.
Many nations have a welfare state, but that is not socialism because they still allow private ownership of industry and stores.

Correct. Full-on socialism sucks and so does laissez-faire capitalism and no rational person would support either over a well-regulated capitalist system with a strong welfare state. The data is pretty clear.

[ckaihatsu]

Correct. Full-on socialism sucks and so does laissez-faire capitalism and no rational person would support either over a well-regulated capitalist system with a strong welfare state. The data is pretty clear.

Here's the thing, though -- 'full-on socialism' historically has been *Stalinism*, meaning that the workers were *not* in control of their own labor-power and the products of their labor.

Here's what the *political* side of socialism would look like:

Soviet democracy, or council democracy, is a political system in which the rule of the population by directly elected soviets (Russian for "council") is exercised. The councils are directly responsible to their electors and bound by their instructions using a delegate model of representation. Such an imperative mandate is in contrast to a free mandate, in which the elected delegates are only responsible to their conscience. Delegates may accordingly be dismissed from their post at any time or be voted out (recall).

In a Soviet democracy, voters are organized in basic units, for example the workers of a company, the inhabitants of a district, or the soldiers of a barracks. They directly send the delegates as public functionaries, which act as legislators, government and courts in one. In contrast to earlier democracy models according to John Locke and Montesquieu, there is no separation of powers. The councils are elected on several levels: At the residential and business level, delegates are sent to the local councils in plenary assemblies. In turn, these can delegate members to the next level. The system of delegation continues to the Congress of Soviets at the state level.[1] The electoral processes thus take place from the bottom upwards. The levels are usually tied to administrative levels.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_democracy

[Unthinking Majority]

Here's the thing, though -- 'full-on socialism' historically has been *Stalinism*, meaning that the workers were *not* in control of their own labor-power and the products of their labor.

Here's what the *political* side of socialism would look like:

You need a dictator to force an entire country to follow ideas as bad as Leninism/Maoism. Even the Maoists in China have abandoned Maoism because it sucks. Capitalism is so cruel and evil that it's lifting billions in Asia out of dire poverty. An inconvenient truth for some.

That doesn't make capitalism perfect. It's as flawed and cruel as human being are. And just like humans, capitalism has to be managed and regulated properly and justly and some socialism needed in the form of welfare programs etc.