[Alf]

Youtube video

[user104658]

But he's talking about Communism, not general socialist policies... he even repeatedly says so. They also laser-focus on the problems caused by communism / extreme socialism whilst barely touching on the problems inherent to unbridled free-market capitalism. As ever; the answer lies in the middle and until we get people to move away from the extreme ends of the spectrum, nothing will change. Deciding that "ALL SOCIALIST POLICIES ARE BAD!" is just as ridiculous as supporting full communism.

[DemolitionRed]

He's trying to simplify something that's hugely complicated.

what does "Socialism" even mean? China, Cuba, Scandanavia, the Nazi party, Burny sanders and even Obama are all seen as socialist but what do they all have in common and how do they differ?

Sweden is a capitalist country with some social government intervention paid for by taxes.

Cuba doesn’t rely on a private free market and is wholly run by its elected government.

When Germany was run by the Nazi’s it was a totalitarian government but still had a capitalist economy.

Obama and Sanders both wanted more government intervention within a capitalist state... a bit like the UK with its NHS, free schools and a better benefits system than the U.S.

Socialism means "A society in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community as a whole, rather than private individuals."
The only one that fits this definition is Cuba but Burny, Obama, and Scandinavia don't want the Cuban model of socialism. They want "social democracy" which is based on capitalism.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

But he's talking about Communism, not general socialist policies... he even repeatedly says so. They also laser-focus on the problems caused by communism / extreme socialism whilst barely touching on the problems inherent to unbridled free-market capitalism. As ever; the answer lies in the middle and until we get people to move away from the extreme ends of the spectrum, nothing will change. Deciding that "ALL SOCIALIST POLICIES ARE BAD!" is just as ridiculous as supporting full communism.

In the middle? otherwise known as betwixt and between, neither use no ornament, sitting on the fence, Indecisiveness.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Alf

In the middle? otherwise known as betwixt and between, neither use no ornament, sitting on the fence, Indecisiveness.

So in your world its either black or its white?

No free at the point of delivery hospitals.
No free schools.
No social security benefits.
No libraries.
No state housing.
No government regulated postal system.
No aid for the disabled or mentally handicapped.
No free nursery places for parents on low income.

If you have nothing in the middle and we move completely away from any form of socialism, we get none of the above.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

In the middle? otherwise known as betwixt and between, neither use no ornament, sitting on the fence, Indecisiveness.

Well if communism doesn't work (as has been proven), and unrestricted free market capitalism doesn't work (as has been proven), then what would you suggest?

[bots]

Well, i forced myself to watch it and it fails in the first point. Left or right, the government dictates policy to the people, its not just socialists that do that.

Secondly, the environment in Russia failed because the leadership took advantage of it and treated themselves better than everyone else. If they had practiced what they preached, it would probably still be going along happily until this day. The move to democracy and capitalism in Russia hasn't really changed that position either. The strongest took advantage when communism collapsed, and they are still in power now.

The only safe ground is middle ground which of course breeds mediocrity, but that is the position that benefits the majority of the people

[Northern Monkey]

Yep as i always see TS saying,Somewhere in the middle is usually the most beneficial outcome.
You can be passionate about particular policies from both ends of the spectrum.It’s only fence sitting if you look at it on the macro level i.e ‘which team do you support?’
When you narrow it down to individual policies and ideologies then people will always have an opinion on them.
I spend every election trying to decide which side of the fence to fall onto.
There is so much of both the parties that i despise.
I have never fallen onto the Tory side of the fence yet.Although i felt fecking sick after voting Labour with Corbyn at the helm.
Socialism is definitely needed within the mix for all our welfare just not to the extremes where nothing gets built or done or it gets all authoritarian or even totalitarian.
Therefore Capitalism is needed too for balance.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

He's trying to simplify something that's hugely complicated.

what does "Socialism" even mean? China, Cuba, Scandanavia, the Nazi party, Burny sanders and even Obama are all seen as socialist but what do they all have in common and how do they differ?

Sweden is a capitalist country with some social government intervention paid for by taxes.

Cuba doesn’t rely on a private free market and is wholly run by its elected government.

When Germany was run by the Nazi’s it was a totalitarian government but still had a capitalist economy.

Obama and Sanders both wanted more government intervention within a capitalist state... a bit like the UK with its NHS, free schools and a better benefits system than the U.S.

Socialism means "A society in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community as a whole, rather than private individuals."
The only one that fits this definition is Cuba but Burny, Obama, and Scandinavia don't want the Cuban model of socialism. They want "social democracy" which is based on capitalism.

Cuba doesn't have an elected government, they are a one state party.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Livia

Cuba doesn't have an elected government, they are a one state party.

But they still have municipal elections, provincial elections, and national elections. Whilst its a single state party, since 1992 has had other political party involvement.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Well if communism doesn't work (as has been proven), and unrestricted free market capitalism doesn't work (as has been proven), then what would you suggest?

Another Drink