Comments by "Hobbs" (@hobbso8508) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1.  @oscartang4587u3  "Fascism is still a class theory base ideology" Not even close. "If you really what to brigde NS into syndicalism" Lol. The unions are on fire, but sure, syndicalism. "There should not be double standards, if those Communist State was still considered as Socialist State, so as NAZI Germany IRL." They aren't by anyone that actually knows what socialism is. They were totalitarian, which is the exact opposite of socialism. "He admitted there are other socialism other than Marxism and its variations." Admitting that there are other types of socialism does not mean that Nazis and Fascists are socialists. They aren't. "TIK point is more about the nationalisation of trade Union which is a trade of Socialist Country" Except actual socialist countries would do the exact opposite of this. "It is the problem of set and subset, Communism and NS are two small circles within the big circle of Socialism" Keep chanting it, it will be true some day. Meanwhile there was exactly zero common ownership or control over the means of production in Nazi Germany.
    3
  2.  @oscartang4587u3  1. You are confusing political rhetoric with reality. Fascism at it's core is ultra nationalism. 2. Call them whatever you want, but they do not fit the definition of socialism. 3. And what is the criteria of "western democracy"? Marx and Engels literally said outright that the very first thing to do in a socialist state would be to establish democracy. Again, you post quotes you do not understand. They are referencing a pre-socialist state, not one that has established socialism.
    3
  3.  @oscartang4587u3  No, they just use nationalism. The justification is irrelevant. You are confusing your own ideology with facts. So...democracy. Yes, any socialism that works through a state requires that.
    3
  4.  @oscartang4587u3  1. No. They are both forms of nationalism and both forms of state capitalism. How they justify it is irrelevant. 2. No, it's just democracy. 3. They put social ownership into the definition. 4. Again, you are wrong. This is a pre-socialist state. Continuing to quote something you obviously don't understand is actually embarrasing.
    3
  5.  @colebehnke7767  Nope. Again, they were nationalists and racists. That's textbook right-wing Republicans. Why do you think avowed neo Nazis vote right?
    3
  6.  @colebehnke7767  Sure. Oh look, Nazis voting Republican. Who knew.
    3
  7.  @colebehnke7767  Except we aren't even using some Soviet usage of the word. We are using the modern description of US politics, which again, has literal Nazis voting Republican.
    3
  8. North Korea's full name is the Democratic Republic of North Korea, but it ain't a democracy nor arguably a republic. Oh, and don't eat that urinal cake.
    3
  9.  @TheImperatorKnight  Still total bollocks. North Korea is absolutely not a democracy. Democracy does not mean "we hold a sham election every few years", it means your vote actually means something. In fact there is a Democracy Index that covers how democratic a nation is by looking at the following categories: Electoral process and pluralism Civil liberties Functioning of government Political participation Political culture Guess who shows up at the bottom of that list? Oh right, North Korea, just above Myanmar and Afghanistan.
    3
  10. They weren't implementing at all, just like North Korea isn't a democracy.
    3
  11.  @colebehnke7767  If he could then that would be a different story, but clearly he can't.
    3
  12. ​ @oscartang4587u3  Weird you say that socialism is about social ownership, then point to Nazi Germany, a state where people had zero ability to decide who was in charge, and therefore had no social ownership.
    3
  13. ​ @colebehnke7767  Nazism is a form of fascism, even TIKs sources agree with this.
    3
  14. ​ @BJ-lq6js  The important part however is worker's having said control, which they did not in Nazi Germany. The movement of private property in Nazi Germany did not go to party officials, just party members. These are ordinary voters loyal to the Nazis, not government employees. Abolishing private land is also not socialism or communism. You have to give the general populous control of did land for it to be communism. Even then, communists believed in personal property as separate from private property, so a house is personal, the hundreds of acres of farm land around it is private. Still not sure why you're pointing to Russia. They faked elections and subverted the will of the people. They were not socialist.
    3
  15. ​ @colebehnke7767  Everything.
    3
  16.  @colebehnke7767  Except it wasn't. The property was put right back into private hands.
    3
  17. ​ @TheImperatorKnight  Those steps look like they'd fall over at any second. No wonder the local government ripped them up to put in proper concrete and steel.
    3
  18.  @oscartang4587u3  Try using some common fucking sense.
    3
  19. And since he created a non-democratic state, he was not working on behalf of anyone but himself. He was basically just a monarch.
    3
  20.  @oscartang4587u3  Like all state capitalism, yes. They centrally controlled the market while businesses were owned privately. Competition still existed, but prices were fixed. Capitalism does not mean free market.
    3
  21. He's a libertarian, so yes, he thinks all government is socialism.
    3
  22.  @colebehnke7767  You mean aside from the fact that Nazi Germany retained private ownership of businesses? What more do I need?
    3
  23. ​ @colebehnke7767  But the Germans did not collectively control the German economy.
    2
  24. ​ @oscartang4587u3  Read the Communist Manifesto then let me know which country fits the definition of communism; a moneyless, stateless and classless society.
    2
  25.  @oscartang4587u3  Except they aren't trying to do that at all. They are state capitalist states with a vanguard party, no democracy and a completely compromised ideology. It's just fascism and totalitarianism, like all state capitalist nations.
    2
  26.  @oscartang4587u3  Socialism in general, yes.
    2
  27.  @oscartang4587u3  The literal first goal of post-revolutionary communism is to establish democracy. In fact, the Communist Manifesto specifically states that revolution isn't even necessary in democratic states. "We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy." "Question 16: How do you think the transition from the present situation to community of Property is to be effected? Answer: The first, fundamental condition for the introduction of community of property is the political liberation of the proletariat through a democratic constitution." "Question 17: What will be your first measure once you have established democracy? Answer: Guaranteeing the subsistence of the proletariat." Event he section you previously quoted was really just your lack of understanding. They were saying that the only way you can guarantee democracy and fairness for the workers is by changing the system as it existed before. It then lists how the parts of the previous system would be changed democratically, and even states that these changes would not be all at once, and would require systematic change by the people. In fact the stuff they list is pretty damn progressive: Progressive taxation Inheritance taxes Compensation paid from businesses to employees for the work they have performed without proper payment over the years Minimum wage laws National banking system National manufacturing initiatives Universal education Construction of low-income housing Destruction of dangerous and poorly constructed houses Equal inheritance rights for children born out of wedlock National transportation network I mean, you could argue that it goes too far with some of the other measures, but many countries currently do a lot of this stuff these days.
    2
  28.  @oscartang4587u3  "those points are for before getting the power not after." Wait, so now you're just straight up admitting that those points are for establishing Marxism via democracy? "And you censored and modified the last point for your own aganda. " I didn't modify any points. I pointed specifically towards the points that many nations are currently doing, and were actually very progressive for the time. Concentration of all means of transportation in the hands of the nation is literally a nationalised transport network. Remember, cars didn't exist at the time, so they are talking about trains. Many nations still have nationalised rail networks in some capacity. "used as a means for putting through measures" Yes, that is what democracy does. You use it to enact change democratically. "It is democracy result needed to guarantee those changing the system." Just proving my point now. Not sure what you were trying to say here, but thanks for proving me right.
    2
  29.  @oscartang4587u3  "The last sentence especially "necessary result" indicated that the voting results were predetermined." No, it mean that you have to vote this way in order to enact the changes to society that were laid out earlier in the manifesto. "The point you are mentioning was just Karl Marx mean and method overthrown the capitalist state(revolution). None of those points were about after overthrowing the capitalist state. Even Nazi and Soviet Union established via democracy." So there never was a Russian Revolution or a Burning of the Reichstag? You know Hitler was never elected as leader of Germany right? Again, I was pointing out the specific measures that are similar to current countries. The abolition of private property does not match current nations, but it's also not really relevant to the discussion. As the Manifesto says, this is done democratically. So what exactly are you even hoping to achieve?
    2
  30.  @oscartang4587u3  It isn't limiting democracy. Again, Hitler never won an election. They had a country wide election after their revolution. But your last part was right.
    2
  31.  @colebehnke7767  The part about common ownership or social control depending on the source. Common ownership requires collective decision making, meaning socialism requires democracy to be socialism.
    2
  32.  @ExPwner  Hey Ben. Still uneducated I see.
    2
  33.  @ExPwner  Tell me, how do you get common ownership without democracy. Can't wait to hear.
    2
  34. ​ @andreoliveira6371  "Shame slavery ended, wish we could have that again. Also, why is marrying children illegal?" - Every libertarian scholar ever.
    2
  35.  @colebehnke7767  Nah, it just shows your definitions are wrong.
    2
  36.  @colebehnke7767  You're confusing working with exploitation. If I farm more than I need then I get to keep the excess. That is not exploitation, that is keeping the fruits of my own labour. If however I work the land, then some capitalist takes my excess, then I don't get to keep what I produced. Someone is profiting off my labour.
    2
  37.  @colebehnke7767  Because they are exploiting the labourer. Said that already.
    2
  38.  @colebehnke7767  Yeah it does. Labour literally produces that which has value. No labour, no production.
    2
  39.  @colebehnke7767  In truth market socialism and libertarianism are both about removing control from government, a more anarchists approach to an economic and political system. Where libertarianism fails is it doesn't give that power back to the people, but instead gives it to businesses. In libertarianism what is stopping businesses from simply acting like authoritarian governments?
    2
  40.  @colebehnke7767  In what way would they prevent tyranny from corporations? It's just waiting for monopolies to pop up and start controlling markets. Once corporations become larger than the government, why do you even need government at all. Welcome to the problems of a power vacuum.
    2
  41. ​ @colebehnke7767  No, he suspended private property rights which allowed the government to remove property from people. Private property still existed, and even expanded, during the Nazi government.
    2
  42. ​ @colebehnke7767  Yes it does. Nazi Germany had plenty of private property.
    2
  43.  @DheezNhutz  "democrats endorsed for slavery during the the first American civil war???" Did you know that Democrats used to mostly populate the South? Maybe check out the Civil Rights Act, you know, when Democrats lost all their supporters in the South and lost every election for years because of their decision to end Jim Crow. When they eventually did get their support back they had lost their former strongholds. You also left out FDR and all the social welfare reforms. "Also they support antics terrorist" Oh look, Jan 6. "changing the sex if children" You mean allowing trans children the option to transition when they turn 18 by offering puberty blockers, as well as a shit load of therapy? What's funny is this is the exact opposite of the Nazis. They hated stuff like this. "and late term abortion" Quick, control the women's bodies. "taking guns away and taking free speech and your right to bear arms?" So important you had to say it twice. Not sure why you think registering and licensing firearms, just like we do for cars, is a bad move. Also, your right to say what exactly? What speech is being stopped? "The nazi did those republicans don’t so go fact check yourself" Hang on, let me just go find a few things: https://youtu.be/Q-TBE7EwSTs https://youtu.be/-e3T3VHmEkg https://youtu.be/RIrcB1sAN8I https://youtu.be/AZGulUatdFk https://youtu.be/davsTFg2P88 https://youtu.be/P3ULXoBiHOI https://youtu.be/dvmPJJhjOMo
    2
  44. ​ @colebehnke7767  But market socialism uses a free market.
    2
  45. There's a reason for that.
    2
  46. ​ @colebehnke7767  No, it doesn't. You really don't understand socialism do you.
    2
  47.  @-Benito_Swagolini-  The German people did not have common ownership of the means of production. For starters business ownership shifted to privatisation during the Nazi regime. The Nazi government sold off a vast array of previously publicly owned entities, including banks, public utilities and more. Not sure how privatisation leads to socialism. On top of that, even of your argument is that the government owned more things, which they did not, that has nothing to do with the German people. The Nazis were authoritarians. They banned political opposition and ran unopposed for their elections. So if your argument is that the government owning something means that the people own it, you would be wrong. The people had zero say in how the government operated. That means your claim that anything owned by the nation is owned by the German people is total nonsense. So congrats, you are very confused, and really capped it off with that brain dead propaganda at the end. "Racist socialism", Jesus, you swallow anything TIK says don't you.
    2
  48. ​ @oscartang4587u3  Purging races isn't socialism. Socialism is about workers owning the fruits of their own labour. That has everything to do with class, and nothing to do with race.
    2
  49.  @oscartang4587u3  Social ownership does not mean government ownership.
    2
  50. Just don't eat that urinal cake. And avoid going to the Democratic Republic of North Korea.
    2