What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Late-Night Politic: Socialist Leads Democratic Primary, R's Nuts (1 Viewer)

I understand the distinction. As far as it filters down to me, Sanders has always described himself as a "socialist" and thus remains an independent member of the American legislature. He also has a radical student past, which I've recently read about and just kind of always assumed. I have trouble with a self-described "socialist" not knowing that socialism means owning the means of production and setting prices, wages, and proscribing labor. I could be dead wrong, but I'm not sure about that. Perhaps he made the distinction and I am unaware. I'm always surprised that anyone would take the "democratic socialist" moniker and then apply it to themselves in such a reductive way.

Look, at times, one scratches, sniffs, and finds the ### of the matter, if you know what I'm saying.

Perhaps I'd be much more amenable to Bernie's solutions knowing his platform recently.
This sounds eerily similar to complaints about our current President.
Don't care. This guy calls himself a socialist. I know what the hell a democratic socialist is. He wants to own the means of production at a state level. This is an extreme position -- much more extreme than Republicans, which is what this thread is about.

He leads the Democratic primary in New Hampshire, and this is becoming a story.

From the WSJ, a righteous takedown.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-democrats-socialist-surge-1439334004
Has he really said anything remotely like that? I don't think so, but I'm open to some links to his quotes on that if you got them.

Also - does it really get any more socialist than our perpetual war meat grinder providing government jobs to soldiers and welfare to military production corporations? Seems like expanding that is the really big idea all the Rs had at the last debate. Pretty sure Sanders wants to cut military spending.
I linked in post #33 and to the WSJ article, which is now sadly behind a pay wall (it wasn't before.)

It sounds, from what I can ascertain, that his definition of socialism is nebulous. However, he has written often for socialist publications, insists he is not "scared" of the word, and orders the word in a specific philosophical way that indicates to me that yes, he is in favor of the means of production being owned by the state even though he dissents from that at times. I would guess it depends on which audience he speaks to, but politicians are statesmen, if nothing else. It would be like me using the words "anarcho-capitalist" and then claiming that, well, "anarcho-capitalist" is really up to interpretation, and we don't have a concrete definition, blah, blah, blah. He repeats that he's a democratic socialist, over and over. What more do people need? This is a guy who traffics in socialist thought and publications. He knows what the ordering is, and what it means.

And the military, government contracts, and other things that go along with it are certainly a sign of statism. I don't think people debate that. How necessary -- and to what extent they are necessary -- is the R debate.

And on a lighter-hearted note, roadkill1292's post to the http was indeed hilarious, and I enjoyed the link, if not the criticism of what fuels a late-night political thread. (I would ask about Estonia's economic freedom ranking, though, and whether it fits in with Scandinavia...)
So, you're making everything up. Except for the inevitable fringe dozens, nobody is advocating for state ownership of production yet you are concluding that Bernie and his supporters are in favor of it by some kind of weird extrapolation. This isn't debate, this is BGP-like paranoia. It's Joe McCarthy seeing Commies under every bed.

 
So, you're making everything up. Except for the inevitable fringe dozens, nobody is advocating for state ownership of production yet you are concluding that Bernie and his supporters are in favor of it by some kind of weird extrapolation. This isn't debate, this is BGP-like paranoia. It's Joe McCarthy seeing Commies under every bed.
I'm making up that Bernie Sanders, self-described socialist, doesn't know what the ordering means in his own statements. Daily Kos, which dissents from my view of Sanders, just posted an article describing what "democratic socialism" was. So either he's ####### stupid, or he's lying.

Democratic socialists on the other hand are typically seen as more radical left-wingers and advocate the outright replacement of capitalism with socialism. European parties such as Greece's Syriza or Spain's Podemos aim to drastically reduce inequality through radical changes in policy. Democratic socialists would have government inject itself into the financial system and take control of natural resources to help the broader populace before private profit.

Despite his chosen label of democratic socialist, Bernie Sanders is very much a social democrat. He repeatedly will tell you how much he admires Scandinavia. That region is the modern poster child for social democracy and its countries are the most progressive, happiest, and equal in the entire world. Sanders is not proposing radical policies, but simply what many Europeans have realized is common sense. Even in America, many of his proposals enjoy broad support, just not among elected officials.

Great. Nice party.

Awesome. I'm a McCarthy-ite.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lots of parellels between Bernie and Norman Thomas, another guy who called himself a socialist, yet in practical terms spent his life working to increase the welfare state in the USA. Most of his specific ideas were adopted into the New Deal.

 
Lots of parellels between Bernie and Norman Thomas, another guy who called himself a socialist, yet in practical terms spent his life working to increase the welfare state in the USA. Most of his specific ideas were adopted into the New Deal.
Interesting guy.

 
This is a good read take on what this brand of Socialism, specifically Demostratic Socialism, really means.

http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/08/gop-and-mainstream-media-read-this-to-understand-democratic-socialism-and-why-people-are-feeling-the-bern/
It means lots of stuff for "Free ##### Army" on the taxpayer dime which is further subsidized by the dismantling of the military, currency devaluation, and massive debt accumulation. Europe is already much further down that road and rather than learning lessons from the difficulties they are now facing people seemed hell bent on following them down the same short-sighted, hedonistic path. So be it. I'm just glad at my age I won't be around when it all finally comes crashing down. I do fear deeply though for the future of my family. An older man like Sanders with seven grandchildren to think about should know better.

 
TPW said:
This is a good read take on what this brand of Socialism, specifically Demostratic Socialism, really means.

http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/08/gop-and-mainstream-media-read-this-to-understand-democratic-socialism-and-why-people-are-feeling-the-bern/
It means lots of stuff for "Free ##### Army" on the taxpayer dime which is further subsidized by the dismantling of the military, currency devaluation, and massive debt accumulation. Europe is already much further down that road and rather than learning lessons from the difficulties they are now facing people seemed hell bent on following them down the same short-sighted, hedonistic path. So be it. I'm just glad at my age I won't be around when it all finally comes crashing down. I do fear deeply though for the future of my family. An older man like Sanders with seven grandchildren to think about should know better.
What a load of crap. How's that austerity working out? Triple dip recession sounds like fun.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top