Comments by "" (@rstevewarmorycom) on "OxfordUnion" channel.

  1. 1
  2. 1
  3. 1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. No, it's a fact. I'm NOT saying that "nobody knows" and therefore my supposition is correct. THAT WOULD be an "argument from ignorance". I'm saying simply that no government so far has actually been Socialism, as I define it, which I can readily describe to you without any hairy-fairy pipe-dreams. And my form requires NO modification of the human character. You must simply make it so terrifying to cheat that nobody dares even think of doing it. Then cooperation grows as an ethic among a people who sees that it works. I know EXACTLY what strict laws are required by a Socialist government of the People in order to meet the definition of a Socialism. It has never before been tried by my definition, and I can be highly specific about what it requires. It has not even ever before been tried by the political science definition either, which is available in textbooks. Centrally controlled production of food was a disaster in the former USSR because it was corrupt from top to bottom and didn't enforce severe consequences on dissidents and subversives. The USSR was NOT Socialist, the Politburo families were a rich elite who stole lots of the production and sold it abroad to feed their craving for luxuries. Tanzania was a corrupt dictatorship with no interest in the people at all. When in WW II England absolutely forced farmers to grow more crops and their own vegetables for local consumption with harsh threats of confiscation of farms, the people did it just fine, producing in one year nearly twice the food they had produced the previous year. Control works, if it is absolute and corruption is weeded out by multiple layered investigation, confiscation, and torture and death penalties for defrauding the People. None of the events you cited was Socialism. Socialism is NOT theft, it cannot BE theft, it is stealing back what was stolen by the rich. You are a capitalist liar, you would be put to work in a work camp for spewing that nonsense. The robber doesn't GET to complain about having to return what he has stolen!!
    1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. No, it doesn't need to be centralized. Jobs are performed close to home, so the local community decides what they want to pay to have done. The features of the requirement to work are universal truths, they don't depend on the economic system. If people don't work, they don't get food, been true since the paleolithic. Why did you imagine otherwise? Did you imagine I was some fool who thought everything could be FREE, FREE, FREE, like some SJW bozo? The difference between capitalism and socialism is that there are no rich and there are no poor, and the formerly rich starve if they don't work just like anyone else. I have no problem with starving people, and if someone interferes with that righteous process they DESERVE to be tortured. It's subversive of the Socialism. That's how we got the rich, letting people not work!! No, the torture in capitalism is merely subtle and not specified. The "freedom" to sleep under a bridge in the rain, etc. People never know whether they will starve to death or whether they can rob someone else and get away with not working. This encourages crime and unfairness. This is the heart of desperation. Better to know exactly what you must do to be secure and safe. You don't need monolithic states, you can have lots of communities that do all these same things. It's like a big tribe, you do your work or nobody feeds you. Pure? Not MY claim. There isn't any such thing. TRUE Socialism merely meets the requirements of the People, not any elite. Once again, you've blabbered a pile of brainwashed nonsense and imagined that you're intelligent. You're not.
    1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. All a matter of degree. Europe is sociallized, more than socialist, but they are on the road. Yes,here, the upper 30% of the population seems to be hail and happy. They get to buy pretty much everything they want, but at the expense of the rest of the people. By the People, I mean the deprived, the victims of this theft, usually a majority in severely capitalist countries. You can stop blabbering about "the People" now, you only sound stupid. Many socialized medical systems in Europe either pay malpractice insurance from a fund, or strictly limit awards and judgments and use professional courts instead of economically angry juries. No, you have no "long lines" there. In the NHS you can get an appointment today or tomorrow, try that with US specialists, a month to two months out!! We need MORE physicans, time to take the quota off medical schools and force them to take all comers.And yes, the next thing that need to be stopped is private inequitable medical care. Take what is paid by the rich for that, with confiscatory taxes, and use it for the national health. I've seen the stats on migratory physicians, just as many US doctors go to Europe and socialized medical systems as come here imagining to make out like a bandit. The statistics deny that they come for the pay, usually electing to work in public health. New tits? Should be illegal except for restorative purposes. No government should subsidize unnecessary surgeries. If we have a problem with doctors leaving, we can alter our system of educational credentials to make it impossible for them to be apprised by another system. Or, as I said, make it impossible to take any wealth with them. We can also train more doctors, but at a less specialized course of study, or divide up the specialties differently, or train more specialized physician's assistants and surgeons specialized in only specific surgeries, like the NHS does. This has reduced "doctor flight" in recent years. We can also close the borders to doctors, under national security edicts, or force them to completely train a cadre of replacements before they are allowed to leave. We don't actually want greedy subversives, corrupts the national honor and character. We'll let them go and import immigrants who share our ideals.
    1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1