(May 28, 2018 at 6:45 am)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(May 28, 2018 at 6:14 am)Libertarian God Wrote: I should mention I did pay for my college out of pocket with my own money. But i imagine you were talking about the public education system in K-12. And I could probably defend myself since I own multiple firearms and other weapons and understand self defense. But good point nonetheless.

You said you went to community college, community colleges are heavily funded by state money that is why they are so affordable. So you were able to start at a community college because the contributions of others made it affordable.

True. I guess that would be a form of socialism. But, I could argue I contributed towards that because I pay those taxes. I think we could go in circles with this. But nonetheless I still paid myself, didn't take out any government assistance.

(May 27, 2018 at 3:37 pm)Edwardo Piet Wrote:

(May 27, 2018 at 3:07 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Your point is because communism and Marxism are different, therefore Marxism should be given a chance even though communism has revealed its fatal flaws.   My point is however they otherwise differ, they share the same fatal flaws.   So failure of one illustrates the unworkability if the other.

Like you already admitted, Marx's philosophy as idealized was never put into practice.

The conclusion from your admission? Well, because it was never put into practice there's no evidence of its flaws in practice. You made my point for me.

That's a non sequitur. It doesn't follow that because a pure example doesn't exist that we can't learn things from an imperfect example.

(May 28, 2018 at 7:50 am)Libertarian God Wrote:

(May 28, 2018 at 6:45 am)Mr.wizard Wrote: You said you went to community college, community colleges are heavily funded by state money that is why they are so affordable. So you were able to start at a community college because the contributions of others made it affordable.

True. I guess that would be a form of socialism. But, I could argue I contributed towards that because I pay those taxes. I think we could go in circles with this. But nonetheless I still paid myself, didn't take out any government assistance.

Sure you took government assistance, you paid a discounted rate and attended a community college, the reason it was affordable is because of government funding. The fact that you contributed to the pot is irrelevant, Would you say that a person with a job, paying taxes, and receiving food stamps is not receiving government assistance?

(May 28, 2018 at 4:08 am)Libertarian God Wrote: What if some of us like me and several others for instance do not want to pay for someone else? I look out for myself, I am a hard working American that minds their own business, follows the law, pays his taxes and so on.

Now you're starting to sound like the Just World Theorists I was talking about earlier . . .

It's about helping the people less well off than you. And, whether you like it or not, even all your hard work is ultimately down to luck and privileges. There are many people who never even get the chance.

Luck swallows everything.

Like I said, there's no much thing as a self-made man. And that's why full-blown Capitalism is bad. That's why America is a country where there is not only countless homeless people but there's also lucky douches who think they made themselves shouting "Get a job!" at them.

We are all extremely lucky to be in the position we're in. I don't work and I'm on disability benefits and even *I* am extremely lucky to be in the position I'm in. I'm more than happy with the idea that my disability benefits aren't as high as they could be because there's some people far worse off than me. Sharing is caring.

I have a lot more sympathy for those worse off than me than those better off than me.

People are drawn to socialism because they have hearts. Something Republicans lack.

(May 28, 2018 at 8:13 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(May 27, 2018 at 3:37 pm)Edwardo Piet Wrote: Like you already admitted, Marx's philosophy as idealized was never put into practice.

The conclusion from your admission? Well, because it was never put into practice there's no evidence of its flaws in practice. You made my point for me.

That's a non sequitur.  It doesn't follow that because a pure example doesn't exist that we can't learn things from an imperfect example.

It's a non-sequitur because that wasn't my point. He already admitted my point.

Where did I ever say we can't learn things from the imperfect example? Nowhere, that's where. What I'm saying is that that imperfect example is not an example of the perfect example.

And you're committing a Perfect Solution Fallacy if you think it has to work perfectly or not at all. This is not a case of either the example is perfect or imperfect and since perfect isn't possible then just old any really shitty imperfect example is an example of its failure. It doesn't work like that. If the philosophy wasn't actually put into practice then it wasn't actually put into practice. I'm not saying it has to work PERFECTLY or not at all, I'm saying it has to actually be put into practice in a way that at least resembles the philosophy and not just a strawman of it.

I kind of wonder if Communism can be put into practice as intended.

A small amount of people with such great power are going to naturally become corrupt.

Right wingers assume that this is a big problem for Socialism but it has less centralized power and goverment by consent is what (good) democracies are all about.

I think it's likely the democracies of Western Europe /UK are actually more Democratic than the U.S. of us.

(May 28, 2018 at 10:32 am)The Industrial Atheist Wrote: I kind of wonder if Communism can be put into practice as intended.

Me too maybe it isn't possible. But like I said, that doesn't mean it's been tried. If someone gets a cartoon version of an idea and tries it out you can't say the uncartoonized original was tried.

And, to be pedantic, an imperfect 'version' of something technically isn't the same thing. So yes, indeed, I do not expect the perfect version of something to be tried. But still, the perfect solution fallacy is the idea that either there is a perfect solution or no solution at all. That doesn't imply that if you get an imperfect solution then you've tried out the perfect solution. Perhaps the perfect solution doesn't exist... but that sure as hell doesn't mean it's been tried, lol. But if it does exist, then perhaps it could be tried. Either way, it makes no sense to say that an idea has been tried if something different, even slightly different, was tried. An altered version of X is not X.

The idea that the imperfect version has exactly the same flaws as the perfect version and failed for the exact same reason... well that is an assertion that has yet to be justified and demonstrated. It's not a non-sequitur on my part because I never said otherwise. Maybe it does share the same flaws. Maybe it doesn't. My point is it hasn't been tried.

(May 24, 2018 at 1:03 pm)Khemikal Wrote: .............................................?

How Germany a socialist country? Have they seized the means of production from the bourgeoisie? No. Have they nationalized all their major industries? No. I mean, it's just changing the definition of socialism to mean "having a modern welfare state." Which doesn't fit any definition of socialism that I know of. Germany even has a socialist political party, but they aren't in power and don't control anything.

Enjoy.

Quote:a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms:
leftism, welfarism; More

• policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
  synonyms:
  leftism, welfarism; More
  
  
  
  
  
• (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.