Comments: 126
Derpcerp [2020-02-18 23:49:17 +0000 UTC]
π: 2 β©: 0
Hispanoamericano2000 [2020-02-09 04:05:47 +0000 UTC]
Perhaps you have a problem with that, whoever you have done this ?????
The United States has a political and economic system that has shielded it against Revolutions and Coups of States throughout its history, while Russia has already suffered Revolutions, Civil War, Totalitarian Dictatorship and coups (an attempt to coup d'etat) since reaching its current borders, in the end, what was the beacon of all "intellectuals" for more than 7 decades, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, despite its highly repressive collective system and political tyranny that had prevailed since 1922, it finally rotted and collapsed from within and overnight, that thing had become cosmic dust.
Are these social resentments really going to ever understand that their absurd socialist proposals are pure unrealizable utopias?
Isn't the pile of bodies belonging to more than 90 million dead / murdered human beings as products of revolutions, purges and leftist famines has been enough for them?.
π: 1 β©: 0
EricNorthman90 [2018-10-07 07:30:58 +0000 UTC]
Yes.
Because... Y'know.
America IS capitalist.
Not a lotta people are complaining.
π: 1 β©: 2
Hispanoamericano2000 In reply to EricNorthman90 [2020-02-09 04:09:29 +0000 UTC]
The United States does not even need the utopias that leftists dream of in order to be the world's first economy and the greatest military strength in the world.
Meanwhile, Russia's post-Soviet economy is making water, its ruble currency is being refunded, they (Vladimir Putin to be exact) are determined to continue throwing considerable amounts of money in defense etc etc ... with an economy smaller than that of the US states of California or Texas LOL.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hispanoamericano2000 In reply to BeardApple [2020-05-07 19:05:59 +0000 UTC]
-Socialism is an earthly manifestation of the Collective, exactly the same applies to Communism (utopian), Italian classic Fascism, German National-Socialism, Soviet-style Socialism and Maoism / Socialism with Chinese characteristics, all are manifestations of the same thing called coletivism.
-None of the Nordic countries qualifies as a collectivist economy, all are capitalist, with some of the most open and transparent economies in the world, current and past collectivist experiments all had highly closed economies, therefore, no Scandinavian / Nordic country can be qualified as "Socialist".
-Most Nordic / Scandinavian countries are monarchies, and historical socialists are openly anti-monarchists.
π: 1 β©: 1
Hispanoamericano2000 In reply to BeardApple [2020-05-07 22:20:14 +0000 UTC]
Ha ha ha ha, and who do you think you are to throw those names?
Don't think that projecting what you are onto others is going to work for you in any way, you're quite wrong if you think that, BRUH.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hispanoamericano2000 In reply to BeardApple [2020-05-08 00:29:32 +0000 UTC]
You imply that I have holes in my argument, but in reality it is YOU who has a huge gap in your argument, and it is too obvious ...
"off don't conflate socialism and collectivism"
Ha ha ha ha, you clearly have no idea of ββhistory or the meaning of Socialism to have answered me with that.
ALL HISTORICAL SOCIALIST EXPERIENCES are COLLECTIVISTS, from the Soviet Union, through Communist China to North Korea and Peru during the 70s and do not try to rewrite history to me, the same applies to Italian Classic Fascism and German National-SOCIALISM, If you think I don't know history (just like you) you are hilariously wrong, wherever you live.
I do not know of any country where the Socialists have been an important force at the same time that the form of government is monarchical, in truth, quite a few monarchical governments have been overthrown by Marxist-Leninist Socialists such as in Tsarist Russia and in Greece (the attempts They were futile in the end) during the 1940s and 1950s and finally Iraq in 1958, that and not counting the planned coup attempts by Japanese Communists / Socialists from abroad against the current Constitutional Monarchy of Japan during the Cold War.
Evidences?
I suppose that the man has spent a honeymoon in the (disappeared) Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and was walking around Cuba under a Communist Regime and through Sandinista Nicaragua and that he apologizes to those regimes is more than enough proof in my opinion that old senile is a communist in disguise.
π: 1 β©: 1
DIA-Operative [2018-03-05 09:09:42 +0000 UTC]
As opposed to one party communist nations?
Also, ever heard of these things called third parties?Β Β
π: 0 β©: 1
pdevinney [2018-02-23 13:30:34 +0000 UTC]
LOVE it, right on
π: 0 β©: 0
Kwaad14 [2017-07-18 03:44:01 +0000 UTC]
Maybe becauseΒ its the only system that works?
π: 0 β©: 0
ThomastheWest [2017-06-23 13:30:02 +0000 UTC]
There was that great person who would have been a great presiden.. oh yeah. Doctor Jill Stien. But no, the Republicans chose a TV superstar and the Democrats chose the wife of a famous person. Bollox.
π: 0 β©: 0
Grumpy-Juice-Demon [2017-01-30 03:32:21 +0000 UTC]
Hey, you know you could vote for a third party if you wanted. Like the Libertarian party for instance. I heard they got 4.7% of the popular vote last election, which I believe is more than any other third party.
π: 1 β©: 0
AlaineSniperian [2016-12-21 15:33:39 +0000 UTC]
Republicans-Capitalist
Democrats-Communist/Socialist
π: 0 β©: 1
revinchristianhatol In reply to AlaineSniperian [2017-05-30 21:25:58 +0000 UTC]
Libertarians-Ultracapitalist
Greens-Natural/Ecological
Constitutionalists-Free market
π: 0 β©: 0
Pootis9999 [2016-07-25 15:54:24 +0000 UTC]
Because those are the parties most people like. If a big percentage of country liked Communism, the party would have enough money to enter the presidential race. However, since the majority of Americans like capitalism, those two parties are the ones that will get elected. Also, in a place that has been through two Red Scares, most people don't see communism in a positive light.
π: 2 β©: 0
AmerikanischeNS [2016-06-01 19:21:53 +0000 UTC]
You can vote for any party. Dumbass.
π: 2 β©: 0
Alchetbeachfan [2016-05-14 17:15:06 +0000 UTC]
and they left us for this.
π: 0 β©: 1
cariadferch [2016-04-24 03:12:47 +0000 UTC]
Nah, it should be . . .
* The stupid party (Republicans)
* The evil party (Democrats)
π: 0 β©: 0
OddGarfield [2016-03-18 16:58:10 +0000 UTC]
The Democratic Party is the Socialist Party fool, look around you.
π: 0 β©: 2
Aeroquarius In reply to OddGarfield [2018-03-11 12:49:00 +0000 UTC]
I'm sorry, how?
acidrayn.com/wp-content/uploadβ¦
I'm an Anarcho-Socialist. I talk to my fellow Marxists, Socialists and so on pretty often. They all despise the Democrats.
Democrats are accused of caring about women CEOs more than the poor - one of the running jokes among the left wing is that a Republican would say that 10 people should own half the world, and a Democrat would say that 5 of these people should be women.
Liberalism doesn't even come close to Social Democracy; how could it be Socialism?
I live in Poland. Unlike Americans, we are literally drowning in political parties. Our main Social Democratic Party is Razem (meaning Together). This party advocates for extremely high taxes, welfare and so on. But it's not Socialist. It's not even Democratic Socialist. DemSocs think that we can achieve Socialism via voting; SocDems are like Razem.
I hope that this helps. I'm not trying to argue; I'm merely trying to explain why Democrats are not socialists.
π: 0 β©: 0
Kronstadt21 In reply to OddGarfield [2016-04-11 11:04:34 +0000 UTC]
Okay, then why is Obama supporting free trade agreements?
π: 0 β©: 1
OddGarfield In reply to Kronstadt21 [2016-04-11 11:15:42 +0000 UTC]
Because those were the same styled trade agreements that Richard Nixon used with China.
π: 0 β©: 1
Kronstadt21 In reply to OddGarfield [2016-04-11 11:19:34 +0000 UTC]
If he supports free trade, how is he a socialist? Also, I have never heard a democrat say that they support working-class ownership of the means of production.
π: 0 β©: 1
Rhanaya [2016-02-04 19:30:30 +0000 UTC]
What I never get, is why are in the USA only two Partys to vote for ??
All other Democratic States have more partys in their Parliment.
π: 0 β©: 1
Kwaad14 In reply to Rhanaya [2017-07-18 03:45:27 +0000 UTC]
We don'tΒ have a parliament, and we have many parties, these are just the most popular because of our shitty First past the post voting system.
π: 0 β©: 1
Rhanaya In reply to Kwaad14 [2017-07-21 14:35:00 +0000 UTC]
What you mean you dont have a parliment?
π: 0 β©: 1
Kwaad14 In reply to Rhanaya [2017-07-22 22:16:55 +0000 UTC]
AMERICA DOESNT HAVE A PARLIMENT.
π: 0 β©: 0
ReclusiveChicken [2015-09-11 09:10:27 +0000 UTC]
False democracy.
False meritocracy.
False communism.
Real kleptocracy.
π: 0 β©: 0
Jay-of-Blue-Writing [2015-08-17 16:32:30 +0000 UTC]
You forgot the Libertarian Party.
π: 0 β©: 1
OddGarfield In reply to modernsamurai1545 [2016-03-18 16:58:51 +0000 UTC]
That's the Green Party, they don't care about politics, they care about weed.
π: 0 β©: 1
OddGarfield In reply to RedDiamond28 [2016-04-23 02:47:34 +0000 UTC]
It's not much about politics, it's just a bunch of pot heads and hippies who want to preserve the environment.
π: 0 β©: 1
OddGarfield In reply to RedDiamond28 [2016-04-23 18:25:30 +0000 UTC]
For pot heads it is, but for the rest of the country, not so much.
π: 0 β©: 1
RedDiamond28 In reply to OddGarfield [2016-04-23 21:31:47 +0000 UTC]
So we should just let species go extinct, the world get polluted beyond repair, and cause economic disarray around the world?
π: 0 β©: 1
OddGarfield In reply to RedDiamond28 [2016-04-23 21:40:42 +0000 UTC]
No, we should not, but if we want to have a political party rallying around those topics then they should do so instead of having one that strictly wants marijuana legalized.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>