General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

jean-louis pech
TheDC Shorts
comments

Comments by "jean-louis pech" (@jean-louispech4921) on "TheDC Shorts" channel.

You are a liar. taking only , is what capitalist are doing. Just have to see how is shared the growth of GDP in america. Capitalism was always rich capitalism taking the wealth generated by the work of workers, and leaving them only a small part. In the 19th century workers were generating the wealth of the industry in harsh condition, but were in misery state because of very low wage, while the capitalists were millionaires. Socialism was born because of this condition,and giving to the workers the wealth they are generating. The socialism ios not about taking but about sharing, else for liar and manipulating capitalists. GO learn instead to saying stupidity.
11
Or he is an hired actor with à script 😂
6
In fact young people have better knowledge of socialism than the old generations under the propaganda of the both sides of the cold war. The problem is that most people don't know what is socialism, but see only what propaganda from stalin, mao, etc... and from right wing capitalist are saying. Social democracy come from socialism and drives to the society with the higher level of individual freedom, more equality between men and women, good health care system, etc.... because this is the purpose of socialism, outside the question of economic power.
3
Because Venezuela is not a socialist country, on ideological level. The label socialist is just for the ad. Just the weight of the army in this country exclude it from socialism.
2
caps lock = proof of stupidity seeing socialism = USSR & China is sign of ignorance , at best. You don't accept socailism : 1) because you don't know what is it, what defend the guy you are insulting with your stupid message. 2) you are too stupid for understanding the real ideas of socialism.
2
all socialist experience had been destroyed by : militarist bureaucrats ( under label communist ) , fascists, capitalists, etc... regimes.
2
@johnstewart45 LOL we are speaking of socialism not about capitalism and private property. Then all your example is useless. Everybody is the owner at equal status, this is the collective power. Pure capitalist politic generate poverty and misery , like all along the 19th century. And again by going against regulation, the USA are making rising the poverty while only a little hand of riches gather the wealth generated. Yes speaking of economic growth is nice, but when we see for each range of wealth their effective economic growth each year it look bad for many Americans. What is say is the result of research about the history of socialism idiot, then keep your false lessons for you. The fat is that countries where parties with real socialist philosophy had power are among the best countries in term of individual freedom, global quality of life, etc.... Like we can see in western Europe, where socialist or social democrat parties get the head of governments, making the society more free, better place to live.
2
And scientific police can tells the sex of bonnes found , and xhen they reconstruct the face there is no problem for telling if it is a man or a woman. They took à random guy in the street as expert?
2
You are a liar, this guy don't want something like cuba, who is an offspring of stalinism, with high military and policy power, but real socialism. "Socialism is a political ideology that advocates for an egalitarian redistribution of wealth and power in society through a democratic ownership and distribution of society’s means of production (producing goods and making money)." Like it was defended in Western Europe, and the more reformist trend became the social democracy. It gives the politics that favor the more the individual freedom.
2
it is not sign of intolerance, jsut a sign a stupidity by peoples who do not understand what means the word socialist.
1
@kevg4743 laugh at the stupidity is laugh at far right peoples, because they have lower average intelligence than other, and their cognitive process are those linked to primitive and basic way of thinking (binary without deep reflection ).
1
lol you are too ego centered for understanding socialists. You believe that they think like you, you are wrong. Socialism is not about egoism like libertarianism, but about a deeper vision of the society and the understanding that the bad things on other has bad effects on you, your freedom, etc.... For example a high level of economic inequality goes hand in hand with a higher level of criminality. Socialists can understand this, not libertarianism.
1
he is too stupid for destroying any ideology . His ideology is based on fear, and fear is the enemy of the intelligence.
1
@hairedesigned3833 youtube strange :i have several versions of your message, the last one is not full..... i have lost your longer message..... well 1) what you say does not go against what i say because taking for himself (egoist/egocentric drive) is capitalist not socialist. Socialism being based on equality and unity is about sharing wealth not taking for himself. Real socialism is about working together and sharing the wealth produced, and not lower level ( the workers ) working and higher level ( the capitalists ) taking the wealth. The opening message is just a big liar. 2) you are missing the point of socialism versus capitalism. It is not a question of free market, this is a question of power! The power taken from the capital by the capitalist on the workers. I guess you are totally ignorant of the capitalism of the 19th century, before socialist idea were slowly infused in democratic society. What made lower the poverty was the better sharing of wealth and better condition of worker given by socialist ideas, else it is only very rich capitalist and workers living in misery without rights and freedoms. Look western countries where socialist or near socialist ( social democracy) governments have ruled, they offer better living condition , less misery, more rights and freedoms for workers, etc.... If it is not socialist or near socialist it is Worker's Union fight that help worker to have a better life standard as worker. In the 19th century capitalist was limitless, and the workers were living in misery. Then one century of capitalist did not reduce poverty. On the other hand socialist and communist pressure on capitalist societies helped worker to get a better wage, better working condition, more rights and freedoms, etc.... In fact you are just using the ego centered view of the capitalist who think only to himself, and unable to think about non capitalist people (workers, etc... ), and then reduce society and economy to a game between the capitalists discarding the reality of the majority of the population, discarding the game of power from the capitalism. In fact you are confusing economic liberalism with capitalism, a system of hereditary corporation owning all the market, is capitalist if the capital is owned by the members of the families, giving them the right to rule the enterprises and peoples in the enterprises, and defending their private interest before all , while there is no free market. Self made man or hereditary , does not answer to the real problem.
1
@TheHilltopPillbox lol cold fact : along the 19th centuyry of full capitalism without socialist interferences : workers were in misery. One century! where people stay in poverty because it was capitalism, because capitalists did not had counter power for sharing the wealth generated by the work of the workers. On the other hand country with government from party originating from historic socialist trend ( then excluding all country at the east of the western Europe) have the better sharing of wealth and then the higher level of life for the majority of the population. On the other hand, Bangladesh ( just one example ) have a capitalist economy working for the great capitalist corporations, and workers live in misery and in bad condition because there socialist ideas had no print on the economic and social policies. Proving that capitalism does not reduce poverty. And what you call socialism is not socialism because it does not fit with the ideas of socialism : democratic politic and economic power. Capitalism reduce poverty when political trends and unions of workers force capitalist to make a better share of wealth. Then without socialism , no reduction of poverty in Western countries, workers would be in misery state without rights.
1
@TheHilltopPillbox The point is that pure capitalism is shit else for the capitalists. The point is for reducing poverty you must share wealth instead of concentrating it in the hand of the capitalist minority. The point is that without socialist ( at least influenced ) policies, capitalist keep all the wealth for self, and then workers are poor while they can work far more than in western Europe where socialist policies have been implemented. Go tell that in Bangladesh to the poor workers that were kept locked in their burning workshop.... It is not just a question of money, but of rights, protections, etc....
1
@TheHilltopPillbox yes this is capitalism : the power of the owners acting for their selfish interest over non owners who are just pawn for them. Capitalism allows that because capitalist are allowed to do anything they want within their private economic property, this is the power given by capitalism. Socialism is born against that. You have no clue. Face to the unlimited power of capitalist with their private property and over workers : capitalism let free hand to the power of the selfish capitalist by nature, socialism limit or forbid capitalist power. You are so ignorant that you are confusion capitalism with liberalism. You are blind, like i said already : look ONE CENTURY of capitalism without limitations from socialist ideas along the 19th century! Capitalists were riches and workers were in misery, proving that you have no point or real argument but only blind ignorance. The capitalist were keeping the profit without sharing nothing with the workers. Facts are against your speech. Riches capitalists in poor countries are the other proof of what is say. This is socialist ( or inspired ) policies that force capitalist to share wealth, not capitalism. You don't understand nothing.
1
@TheHilltopPillbox Well i see you are unable to acknowledge what is pure capitalism, what kind of society it gives, and then you speak in the void. You are unable to understand that western Europe have some social politics originated from socialist movement, that was fought by defenders of the pure capitalism. I speak about socialism not about stalinism or other eastern authoritarians regimes you are out of subject, don't came with confusion from propaganda. You should recall me that north korea is a democracy too if we follow your ignorance coming from propaganda of authoritarians regimes that do not follow definition of socialism .... You are the one making mistake, i just have real knowledge about what is capitalism and socialism. I know that pure capitalism is about workers living in misery because capitalism have all the power and not limitation in their greed. You don't care about facts, history, then keep your useless lessons. The fact is if non capitalists peoples are not poor, in misery in western countries this is because there was sharing policies imposed to the capitalists against their will, by socialist and left wing movements. Then this is not because of capitalism that people are not poor, because it is against capitalism principle : the power of decision only to the owners of private capitalist property deciding for their selfish interest. You are useless you don't know what is socialism, all the name you are speaking are country that do not follow definition of socialism. For the french socialist Pierre Leroux socialism was defined by "freedom, equality, fraternity, together without loosing one member" he was the guy making this three values the values of the new French Republic in 1848, for other socialist thinker , socialism could be defined by democratic politic and economic power. None of the countries you are naming are close to this definition, then you are useless, you just bring lies with your "socialist paradise". You are really stupid because now china is a capitalist paradise, where capitalist companies can exploit Chinese workers at low price. You have no argument else lioes and bad propaganda for brainless peoples.
1
@noice2606 "Your a joke. North Korea is far from a Democracy," lol you don't understand to what you answer. You don't know what means "IF". It is the conclusion IF we follow your logic saying that this regimes are socialist because they keep a socialist label. Then if you don't believe that North Korea is not a democracy, there is no reason to believe that other totalitarians regimes are what they claim too. It is my point. Self label do not define reality, only analyze of the reality and comparison with the meaning of the label is right. And in this case, well they all fail to be identified as socialists, by following the definition of socialism by socialists.
1
@marinoderienzo3176 i don't buy your blindness. Think simple, the elites are grateful to you.
1
@TheHilltopPillbox Free education and free healthcare are the base for anybody for becoming a free individual. But you need to have a deeper thinking than, what you are doing for understanding that, you need to understand long term effects. Utopian socialism has never been realized, by definition. On the other hand, socialist, social democrat, parties in Europe have made the countries better by applying socialist policies when they were in Governments. This is why social democracy made the Nordic countries the countries with more freedom and equality, with better level of human development. Then Nordic countries offer good access to education and healthcare for all ( well the perfection is not of our world ) . Countries where education and healthcare are not free for all, have less freedoms, lower human development index, etc.... In fact it is just logic.
1
@tylertennies7920 No this is not socialism. You are confusing being rich and being hardworker, it is two different things. Socialism take money to the riches who are in their majority peoples winning wealth with patrimony, not hard workers. Lol i never spoke about Venezuela, or implied that Venezuela was a socialist model, then stop your false stereotypes. You are not saying anything accurate, then learn to grow up.
1
@aydenlui There was no pure socialist country until now..... Then what you say has no base. Socialist governments have bring freedom, and better well being for the majority of the populations in western Europeans countries. Then you are lying. Which socialist country? you buy false labels by totalitarian propaganda. Show me a country with democratic political power and democratic economic power and you will have a basis for your speech. China never had a socialist economy, it was state capitalism. Workers never had any form of power over economy. If the workers do not control the state with democratic system, the state is not socialist on economic point of view.
1
@tylertennies7920 Peoples are riches by exploiting workers ( slavery, feudalism or capitalism) , by conquest of lands that gives them wealth and power, by being children of riches, by winning money on patrimony , etc.... There was only after WWII and until the beginning of the 80's that peoples were becoming riches by work, but it was a nightmare for the big capitalists. With neo liberalism patrimony gives more wealth than work, while average workers become more poor.
1
@tylertennies7920 You care only about the "poor" riches, lol you are so funny. After taxes they are still riches., there is nothing to worry about. This is redistribution. And they did not work for getting the money, some time it is at the expanse of the real workers that they get the patrimony. And that this is a real steal. But you don't care about workers....right? Yes this is like that how work intelligent society, but sharing wealth for making the best society. Societies with the best redistribution are the societies with the more individual freedom and the best well being level, lower crime rate, etc.... Then you are defending bad society, where the only thing that care are the greedy riches. Defending the riches of defending the real freedoms, you have a choice to make, but you can't choose both in the same time.
1
if there is something to laugh this is your stupidity. radical right wing does not go in line with intelligence.
1
socialism is about equal distribution of power by using democratic power in politic ( direct democracy or assemblies without supreme leader) and in workplace ( like cooperatives ) . Capitalism is about giving more power to the owners of private economic property.
1
he must believe that NK is a democracy because the label of the country has the word "democratic" .
1
@icet0p100 Cuba is not socialist, because socialism is about a political system based on democratic assemblies leading the politic and the economy ( assemblies of workers in this case ). Cuba is far from that. European socialism comes from socialism, it keep the democratic base of the socialism , but are too reformist for preaching a social revolution where workers would have a democratic power in the economy.
1
@icet0p100 But Marx is not all the socialism .... There are many trends not associated with Marx, with many thinker who have made definitions of socialism before. When we speak about socialism it is for speaking about other trends than Marx. And even the socialism of Marx is about democratic institutions (assemblies) ruled by workers and common citizen, his model of reference is the Commune of Paris. Cuba is not about democratic institutions ruled by workers, but only the rule of the party. Capitalism is about the rule of the stronger, and under capitalism the stronger is the one who have the bigger capital. This is why capitalist nations are about strong relations between the state and the big capital ( the best proof the war in Iraq in 2003 ). Oh one thing about Marx, like he said one time Marx is not Marxist, and does not see his ideas in political movement called Marxist, and he would loathe on stalinism and other thing label Marxist-Leninist that share no political element with his vision of socialism . Then don't bring Marx when you speak about regimes labeled communist or socialist, and having a link with stalinism. "So, I don't think Socialism has any real democratic assemblies" socialism is defined by socialists and not you. Then your beliefs are not an argument. If i am wrong, then give me the name of the great leader who had all the power in the Commune of Paris in 1871. Which is the socialist experience of reference for Marx as socialist model for him. Well i will spare you time : there is none, the power was in an elected assembly. Showing that you think wrong. Speaking of socialism without knowing anything to socialism else propaganda from all sides of the pacific ocean, is useless. In Cuba it is the state in the hand of a bourgeoisie who own the economy. Like said already, this is not socialism, this is not Marxism too( i mean real Marxism following the philosophy of Marx without adding any 20th century Russian elements). Western Europeans countries are not socialist but : socialist trend have heavily influenced the societies inside democratic governments, this is why in western Europe public service are more important, there are less wealth inequality, less crime rate, better health system (while not perfect), etc... instead of making a society only in the hand of greedy capitalists. Without all this socialists influence,s well the situations in western Europe would be more more ugly. Along the cold war, in fact making the social situation of workers, and average citizen, very bad was forbidden because of the fear of a communist revolution. Between then end of the WWI ( reconstruction and reject of far right ideas ) and this, it allowed western European countries to have the greatest progressive politics.
1
@icet0p100 The fact is that in practice socialism has democratic experience. The Commune of Paris was an assembly elected by peoples of Paris without any supreme leader or anything looking like a chief, a real socialist experience but too short. And this experience became the practical model for Marx for a socialist revolution. The practice that you are speaking is not socialism , it is leninism, stalinism, etc.... who switch the power for the workers/citizens by the power to the party , and with stalin a strong leader above. IN practice, the history says that after the Russian revolution socialist parties in western countries were split in two : socialist parties more reformists and staying in a democratic way, and communists more evolutionary who were taking the soviet experience as model. And with stalin taking the power, he has parasited all the communist parties i the world, with strong antagonism with the more reformists and democratic socialists parties. Only the rising of nazism and fascism in the 30's pushed some political alliances in western countries like in France with the Popular Front , while in the Spanish war Stalin made kill some socialists, anarchists, etc... while being in the same side...... And then in non western countries, and in particular in eastern countries, it was stalinism that was the model of the so called communist revolution. Stalin would no support a real socialist experience, because it goes against his ideology, this is why he left the Spanish republicans while taking the gold of the revolution. This is the proof that in fine socialism and stalinism and other "marxism leninism" are not friends and cannot being confused. This is the reality that the right wing propaganda hide to everybody. The so called "marxism leninsm" is not socialism, because it does not fit with the definition of socialism, not more with the philosophy of Marx. I must recall that the rule of a party on the state and economy by the state , is not socialism. The name of the party does no matters. Socialist do not defend this type of system. Stop to give to socialists ideas against their own ideas. Stop to take the propaganda from stalin, mao, etc... for true.
1
or they are less dumb than you who don't understand what he means.
1
it is a lie. in the time of Marx workers were paid with a misery wage and had hard working conditions ( including very long daily hours of work ) , at the same time the capitalist could be millionaires. If what you say would be true the workers of the 19th century would be richer than now in western countries. It is not the case.
1
@miker3875 "I would contend you don't have to be a socialist to believe in worker's rights and protecting the individual. " But it is socialism! This is why socialism is born because of the state of capitalist countries in the 19th century. Without socialist movements in western countries, there would have far less regulation, protections, good wage (and not for everybody now), etc.... Non regulated market does no offer opportunity to everybody to seek individual happiness, like the American system who does not allow some poor family to get health care to their children, and then making the young children death rate of some categories of the population ( poor blacks ) at the level of third world countries , far under the score the poor Cuba. Peoples with compassion, don't refuse healthcare to children, greedy heartless conservatives and libertarianism yes. Socialism, the real socialism from western Europe, is a left wing ideology, and scientific study about relation between ideologies and neurology show that progressive peoples use more their empathy than conservatives peoples ( who are sensitives to disgust without regulation by empathy ) . Yes socialism is about compassion for the weak, the peoples suffering, the exploited workers, etc.... Egalitarians ideologies are about compassion for all , equal dignity. Inequalitarians ideologies are about dignity for a dominant minority ( or just self ) , and lack of compassion for oppressed social minorities ( while it can be the majority of the population ). The USA spend too much money in army and jails. And conservatives who are anti socialists like to give money in army and jails. This is not a good example. Public Healthcare are the best Healthcare services in the world. Nations with good NHS have the best result with health of the population as a whole ( not just the riches ).
1
@D1s1llus10n what you are describing is capitalism. The power to the capitalist who own the corporations. Any peoples with a brain can understand this simple fact. The propaganda makes you believe it is socialism. Socialism is make the governemnt free from corporation, give the governemnt to the workers, and taking the money to the corporations and redistribute it for better use to everyone . Stop pretending to know what is it, you are a real ignorant.
1
Someone who defends this ideological orientation : "Socialism is a political ideology that advocates for an egalitarian redistribution of wealth and power in society through a democratic ownership and distribution of society’s means of production (producing goods and making money)." After the different trends are about how, when, how fast, etc... make changes toward socialism . This is why there are revolutionaries, and reformists socialists. Socialists where the first guys killed by fascists in Italy in the beginning of the 20's years, that gave the support of the big capitalists to the fascists.
1
Roger Dodger This is not their idea, but your false ideas about socialism. Just by knowing that socialist anarchism and theoretical final purpose of Marxism , is a stateless society, make your claims a joke. The reality is before socialism birth you had one or some capitalism making millions while workers were living in misery and in harsh conditions of work ( mutilations and death were not rare thing in the industry at this time), they have no rights at work, and no political rights, the political power was reserved to the riches in addition of the economic power ( equal rights of vote is an idea from the french left revolutionaries ) , and no access to healthcare for sure. It is all about power. The plutocratic, oligarchic power of the capitalism against the democratic power of the socialism. The privilege to get healthcare and right of vote for the riches against healthcare,education, and right of decision for all.
1
Roger Dodger lol even in big capitalist you have administrative staff for make running a big enterprise. 700 for 3.7 millions of people if you really think with your brain this is not very much. Administrative staff can be useful, they are member of the collective in the cooperative they are there for making a work, while some capitalists are just parasites draining wealth of the enterprise only for themselves.
1
Roger T Groh dumbass right wing don't like truth. Your narrow mind can only understand things in black and white, but here the story is more complex, you are not judging a product you are just judging a label. Socialism was created for making the workers free, not for giving the power to some peoples with the card of a party named communist. Cuba is not what want real socialists in western countries, else for the best part who came from real socialism like the national health system. Only stupid peoples don't want a good national health system for their nation. Oh socialism has existed in western Europe before else where, and it was never about a militarist dictatorship ruled by an ancient officer of the army, but fro making the Europeans countries more democratic, instead of living in a plutocracy where workers were oppressed, like in the 19th century . For your knowledge there was a time where in western capitalist s countries only riches ( white in most countries ) men could vote. Capitalist countries were not democratic at this time, and their were violent against the workers.
1
@christclinger6540 This is not socialism in Cuba, because the power is only in the hand of a minority. While socialism is about giving economic power, and politic power to the greater number. Don't be lured by propaganda of dictatorships who stick label on their front for getting popular support.
1
@jameselmore9145 Any people with a brain understand that democratic socialism is democratic, and not for a dictatorship. Confusing democratic socialism with regimes labeled communist, is as legitimate that saying than libertarainism = Nazism. Democratic Socialism is like social democracy but with a stronger reform of the economic power, for stopping economic exploitation of workers made by greedy capitalists . You know social democracy , the system that gives at the same the higher rank of individual freedoms and good social protection and health system. Stop your stupid straw man. You don't know what is socialism. Socialism is a philosophy coming from western Europe, not from Russia, China, etc....
1
@annemouse6788 you are ridiculous, your claims are the proof that you did not reach college level. This is why for you making peoples more intelligent instead of believing stupid binaries beliefs like stereotype, prejudices, etc... is communism. Going to high level of education make the peoples more open minded, more tolerant, and narrow minded peoples don't like this.
1
@kirikmelet Social democracy, is a soft reformist democratic socialism, who lefts the idea to reform capitalism in deepness, just to correct the bad effects. Democratic Socialism want make the economic power more democratic, like for the political power. With democratic socialism the race to the presidency would not be only between millionaires/ billionaires supported by billionaires, and the winner being those with the bigger support from billionaires, because it is not democracy but plutocracy. In fact with democratic socialism there is no need to have the election of a president , because the power belong to democratic assemblies, and a president has far less power than in the USA.
1
@jameselmore9145 ROFLOL Yes socialism is socialism and democratic socialism is one of his trend. Then you are an idiot who reject reality. Go learn about socialism before saying false stupid things.
1
the most common definition of socialism by real historic socialists thinker is : political and economical democratic power . When you will see a so called socialist countries answering to this definition you can call me. Many people use the word socialism as void label, for propaganda, manipulation, ad , etc.... The guy on the video is a socialist, at least.
1
because CUba fit with that? : "Socialism is a political ideology that advocates for an egalitarian redistribution of wealth and power in society through a democratic ownership and distribution of society’s means of production (producing goods and making money)." If the state is not democratic (and as far i know it is not the case) Cuba can't be labeled socialist. If The Party owns the state who owns the economy, it is not democratic ownership. Well peoples call the paradise of economic exploitation of workers by capitalists, china, communist.... just a big and sad joke. Peoples use meaningless politic label because they believe in propaganda of dictatorship who want hide their real agenda by sticking false labels on their forehead. If castro and co did not used the socialist label, but get a more fitting label, they would have less support.
1
the real taboo word is socialism , because economic elites dislike it.
1
@cameronwiley9412 The idea of capitalism is giving economic power to peoples who own private economic property in form of capital, without limitation. This is what makes the distinction of capitalism from slavery where the private property are peoples, and feudalism where the private property was the land around the castle/church. The idea of socialism is that the property like the power related are collective, every member of the enterprise share the property and the power, there is no privilege. Socialism is think for human beings, peoples with empathy, who can self regulate their desires , etc... instead of thinking like savages animals.
1
far right peoples are brainless they should not get the right of vote.
1
distribution to capitalist and army's friends this is 100% conservative policy. Socialism is distribution for everyone. The country with the strongest redistribution are the countries with the highest index for democracy and freedom : the Nordic country Countries with better redistribution from socialist ideas ( democratic countries where socialist or social democrat parties had power ) have in general a lower level of crime. Bad distribution serves only the private interest of a minority defended by conservatives.
1
The old man was not afraid by the large masculine body of the trans, and stand up with his words. If you listen the video you just hear two men ....
1
Seeing so many stupid peoples is not good for the future.
1
@omaewamosindeiru3191 You confuse you with me because what he says is stupid.
1
Many capitalists win money just by sitting on a chair, or when going to WC.....
1
@tristanwilliams778 i was meaning seating on a chair and doing nothing.....
1
Melissa Capaccio you are a poor brainwashed who does not have the level of intelligence for understanding what is socialism. You are so brainwashed that the only thing you can do is making a stupid message. A full socialist country would be a real democratic country where the power would not be in the hand in less than 1% of the population.
1
@shaunzero real socialism is democratic socialism. stalinism, maoism, etc.. are not socialism because they are not based on democratic power, but only in the concentration of power in the hand of a minority like ... capitalism. Their system have nothing to do with Marx or other socialist thinker. Western Europe is the mother land of real socialism, and socialist parties/movements, were at the head of the democratic fight.
1
Racist Brownie brainwashed brownie is a liar and need to back to school and learn that there is a trend among socialism called democratic socialism. Stupid brainwashed racist believes take his great ignorance about politic ignorance for the paramount of the knowledge. Peoples who are not stupid and who learn , can find that one definition of socialism is : "democratic power at politic and economic level" You need politic and economic lesson .
1
Kaizer Zotac you are just a liar and just say bad propaganda about socialism. You are one of the joker who takes the propaganda of totalitarians regimes for right. Socialism is democracy on political and economic level . This is why it is opposed to capitalism There is no forced redistribution because under socialism economic property is collective , and then it belongs to everyone. Go learn about socialism before saying stupidities. On the other hand capitalism FORCES peoples to stay out of some resources because the resource is privatized and this peoples are poor. And it cans include some vital resources. While with collective property this problem does not exist by nature. You don't understand what is democracy : democracy is a COLLECTIVE POWER where everyone has the same level of power, and decisions are taken by discussions and choice of all members of the collective ( with rules for making a final decisions when there is not unanimity ) . You have direct democracy , for small collective, like a village or an enterprise , or indirect democracy for bigger collectives like cities, regions , nation, or big enterprises. And democracy in enterprises is .... socialism. For a state configuration, the state can be called really socialism only if the state is democratic on political level. Cooperatives are the typical socialist enterprises. Planned market is not what define socialism, socialism was born for giving the power to the workers who create wealth by their work, instead of the power of the capitalist who are exploiting workers. Socialism anarchism has no state for example. On the other hand capitalism is the rule of a minority (the capitalists) over the majority of the workers/employees. In non regulated capitalism like under the 19th century, capitalism was capitalist FORCING worker to live in harsh condition, with a misery wage. AND because the power of the capitalism is not democratic , workers could not do anything. The politic system who was in line with the capitalism was the system that British, Americans and French ( else in Republican period) get after their classic liberal revolution : riches men voting for riches men. All real socialist experience like the French Commune of Paris, are based on an elected assembly without chief. This is Socialism. Then you are just proving that you know nothing about socialism else what totalitarians and capitalist propaganda say. Economic Democracy, is just historic, real , socialism, rebranded, after one century of vilification of socialism by propaganda from totalitarians ans capitalist, well it is none trend among others. https://www.economicdemocracy.us/economic-democracy here the proof that you are an ignorant : https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/what-is-democratic-socialism-definition/ just for the broad definition of socialism : "Socialism is a political ideology that advocates for an egalitarian redistribution of wealth and power in society through a democratic ownership and distribution of society’s means of production (producing goods and making money)." If you believe otherwise, it is because you have been brainwashed by propaganda of stalin, mao, etc..... who wanted to make believe to the mass that their dictatorships were socialism, it is just manipulation from totalitarian systems. Oh nazism share 0% of the definition of socialism, it was just a label for trapping the workers in the hand of racist German nationalism. Stalinism and Maoism are not socialism they are just bureaucratic dictatorship, they can't fit under socialist label.
1
@upbtvo2585 Yes a society with low economic inequality ( using socialist redistribution ) are healthier, they have lower crime rate than societies with high level of inequalities, allow peoples to have the FREEDOM to access to many of important services. A society without redistribution and public service, is a society where what drives the decision of peoples is not the individual will and needs but only money , how money you can get, how money you can afford, etc... Authoritarianism being described by : when what drives the person is external and superior to the individual. Then a full private society is an authoritarian society, because the real drive of the society is money, (external to the person) and is considered as superior to the individual : you can't pay? sorry you will die of this curable disease. In areal individualist society, the need of the individual matters more than money. The functional socialist society like Scandinavians countries , is more individualist than societies based on privates services. The best proof is that they are on the top of individual freedoms in the world world.
1
science prove that far right are stupids, and far right hate socialists.
1
stupidioçty spotted : "GOD fearing freedom loving" 100% oxymoron no freedom where there is fear. Conservatism is fear driven. Real socialist like countries where there is really freedom like Nordic countries on the top of the list of democracy and individual freedom level, who were governed by parties influenced by socialist ideas.
1
@simpleman8937 lol you are avoiding the content of my message, that makes your first message useless. Well you are just making straw man attack against socialism. If you are not able to present your ideas with any coherence , i don't see how you can critic the ideas of others. Your god fearing America don't like freedom for women, nor for poor peoples, nor for black, etc... The fact that it was only in the 60's that there was the end of racial segregation in the USA prove that your country is not freedom loving.
1
you guys have to admit that claming a label does not makes a reality. You have to admit that claiming to be socialist/communist just for attracting the mass, does not make socialist or communist. You have to admit that a communist party without any worker, like in china when mao took the power, does not deserve the label communist. You have to admit that a county that is the paradise for capitalist for having cheep and cheap workers, like china, can't be called socialist or communist. And then you have to admit that what fails in China is not socialism or communism. Just for example.
1
you are just an ignorant who believes in propaganda from stalin, mao, etc... because when they say that they are socialist or communist, you believe them without using you critic mind.
1
conservatives think in binary mode, then not based on intelligence.
1
Capitalism without regulation sucks Capitalism generate inequalities, and inequalities suck. Less inequality goes with better global quality of life ( less or no more misery ), less criminality, etc.... You are not honest by not wanting to understand socialist, by giving them your logic of idea, it sucks.
1
But going closer is better than going toward savage capitalism.
1
@JakeDirkson what you mean by "no?"
1
@LawAcieIV in the 19th century the system was capitalist in Great Britain, USA, Germany, France, and some other western countries . The state had no part in the economy, and there was no collective social systems. In this capitalist system , like for the economic power, only riches men had the political power. It was anti democratic.
1
@fake11end Socialism was defined by socialists in the first half of the 19th century, it was all about cooperatives , mutualism, associationism, etc... and associated with a collective political power (democratic assemblies). And than the socialist state can only be a democratic state controlling/regulating the economy with workers and all other employees controlling the economic power. It is not the bolshevik system where only the Party and the bureaucracy had the power on the society.
1
@lucasseven6660 a guy who had the economic power because he won a big part of the private capital of an enterprise or corporation is a true capitalist.
1
what defines capitalism is power linked to private owning of private property, and main purpose of the enterprise being the private economic interest.
1
@starboycentury2997 brainless dumbass believe that worker owned lead to authoritarian state owned. You are the dumbass.
1
stop reading stalin, mao, hitler, etc... when they say that they are socialist you are just fooled by bad propaganda.
1
North Korea is an authoritarian hereditary monarchy, nothing to do with socialism. Socialism is anti monarchic, and against single ruler. State is nothing in itself, it is just a tool, what defines the political side is how you use the state. Left wing state is at the service of all the population, the majority, like with social democracy in Nordic countries and some politic from other western countries. Right wing state is at a service of the dominant minorities. Like before the revolutions, the state was at the service of the monarchy, the nobles and the clergies. Right wing politic in USA leads to put the state at the service of big corporations like weaponry, oil, etc.... And the last Iraq's war was the best example of a right wing state in action. state = left , no state = right is wrong and just for the brainwashed who can't understand complexity and prefer simple ideas.
1
Arthur Morgan, Formerly 4th Chairman But Marx is Marx, he was not all the socialist movement. The socialist movement was rich and diverse. There is little difference between anarchist socialism and the communism of Marx : a classless , stateless, democratic society. The big difference is how to reach the purpose. The antagonist vision of the stalinist society.
1