Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

Dec 14, 2008 Read more: Newsday 52,708
When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Read more
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36952 Jul 12, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
That's mild. Some folks around here call it a "communist".
There are always the fools and uneducated.

Basically the two are totally differnent.

Socialism means decision by fiat. i.e every decision of government is 'socialism', though most associate it with government support programs for the poor, sick and disadvantaged. But the contract to the military/industrial complex and just as much socialism. So are the 'subsidies' to corporations and specific industries.

Communism though is basically the idea that the citizen can government himself if the 'heirarchy' of power declines. That is, the worker who is best at managing a company will work as the manager without special priveledges or higher salary. Works only in the case of high altruism where survival is dependent on cooperation such as the inuit in the high arctic or some desert dwelling tribes. The ones who hoard, are lazy, etc are weeded out by sanctions from the tribe (usually exile).

It has nothing to do with the 'party oligarchy' that is commonly called communism these days.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Level 1

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

#36953 Jul 13, 2013
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
There are always the fools and uneducated.
Basically the two are totally differnent[sic].
priveledges[sic]
inuit[sic]
Priceless.
Retired Farmer

Princeton, KY

#36955 Jul 13, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
There are always the fools and uneducated.
Basically the two are totally differnent.
Socialism means decision by fiat. i.e every decision of government is 'socialism', though most associate it with government support programs for the poor, sick and disadvantaged. But the contract to the military/industrial complex and just as much socialism. So are the 'subsidies' to corporations and specific industries.
Communism though is basically the idea that the citizen can government himself if the 'heirarchy' of power declines. That is, the worker who is best at managing a company will work as the manager without special priveledges or higher salary. Works only in the case of high altruism where survival is dependent on cooperation such as the inuit in the high arctic or some desert dwelling tribes. The ones who hoard, are lazy, etc are weeded out by sanctions from the tribe (usually exile).
It has nothing to do with the 'party oligarchy' that is commonly called communism these days.
When thinking about the definitions of “socialism” and “communism” among people like Coal is King forget how socialists or communists define their ideology and the textbook definitions. They are irrelevant and do not apply. Here the majority of the people’s worldview is basically theological, that is to say religious in nature. Everything is seen in clearly defined, absolute terms: black and white, good vs. evil. The Cold War instilled the idea that socialism/communism and evil are one in the same thing.

In a theological worldview it is God’s elect (us) vs. the damned sinners (everybody that is not us). People with this kind of worldview tend to bundle unrelated things into a package with their religious beliefs. Their political beliefs and religious beliefs become so intertwined that it is impossible to separate one from the other. If you admit that there is any legitimacy to the other side’s position on any one issue in the package, even though you may totally agree with all the other issues in the package, rejecting that one item is the same thing as rejecting the whole set of beliefs. You are an apostate.

In this case, right wing libertarian economics and minimalist government political philosophy has been bundled with the Christian Right’s social conservatism. Environmentalism, because liberals tend to be more environmentalist-minded, is placed in the others’“evil” package. Coal is placed in the “good” category because it is endorsed and supported by the economic libertarians, who oppose any and all government regulations, environmental and otherwise. To these people, it literally becomes a matter of "If you oppose coal you are against capitalism and free enterprise." There is also the unrelated crossover, "If you are for solar power you are also for abortion."

People who hold liberal beliefs about economic and social issues contribute to and reinforce this “circle the wagons” mentality by bundling their own issues (support for abortion rights, gay marriage, environmentalism, support for social welfare, etc) into a package as well.

So, as I hope you can realize, in this context the terms “socialist” and “communist” do not have very much to do with either their self-definitions or the accepted textbook definitions of them. In this context "socialist" and "communist" (and a new post-911 addition "Muslim") are merely derogatory labels used to designate enemies.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36956 Jul 13, 2013
Even Fox can't deny all the time...

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/07/11/fox-n ...

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#36957 Jul 13, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Even Fox can't deny all the time...
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/07/11/fox-n ...
Heresy!
Retired Farmer

Princeton, KY

#36958 Jul 13, 2013
Here is an example of how the hybrid Christian Right / economic Libertarian propaganda machine works:

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2013/June/Evang...

People like to point to Fox News as the source of this stuff, but Fox is only a part of it. I know people who rely almost totally on CBN for their news and window on the world.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36959 Jul 13, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
When thinking about the definitions of “socialism” and “communism” among people like Coal is King forget how socialists or communists define their ideology and the textbook definitions. Everything is seen in clearly defined, absolute terms: black and white, good vs. evil. The Cold War instilled the idea that socialism/communism and evil are one in the same thing.
Certainly they use labels and demagoguery as their cleverest arguments. False logic and irrational reason but typical. I find the best rebuttal to be..

“It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.” Terry Pratchett, Jingo
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36960 Jul 13, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
In this context "socialist" and "communist" (and a new post-911 addition "Muslim") are merely derogatory labels used to designate enemies.
Thank you for posting on Topix. I find your posts to be uniformly reasoned and reasonable. More to what I would expect of a University professor than a 'retired farmer'. Your life must have been interesting.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36961 Jul 13, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Even Fox can't deny all the time...
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/07/11/fox-n ...
Maybe their site was hacked ,*grin*

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36963 Jul 13, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for posting on Topix. I find your posts to be uniformly reasoned and reasonable. More to what I would expect of a University professor than a 'retired farmer'. Your life must have been interesting.
Yes I agree, we need more retired farmers making those insightful posts. It's a pity that more Americans don't get to make the same points especially on media organisations such as Fox. Have you ever noticed when they have a token liberal guest on, there are 4 others on the panel talking them down. lol They are lucky to say "Hello"
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36964 Jul 13, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
When thinking about the definitions of “socialism” and “communism” among people like Coal is King forget how socialists or communists define their ideology and the textbook definitions. They are irrelevant and do not apply. Here the majority of the people’s worldview is basically theological, that is to say religious in nature. Everything is seen in clearly defined, absolute terms: black and white, good vs. evil. The Cold War instilled the idea that socialism/communism and evil are one in the same thing.
In a theological worldview it is God’s elect (us) vs. the damned sinners (everybody that is not us). People with this kind of worldview tend to bundle unrelated things into a package with their religious beliefs. Their political beliefs and religious beliefs become so intertwined that it is impossible to separate one from the other. If you admit that there is any legitimacy to the other side’s position on any one issue in the package, even though you may totally agree with all the other issues in the package, rejecting that one item is the same thing as rejecting the whole set of beliefs. You are an apostate.
In this case, right wing libertarian economics and minimalist government political philosophy has been bundled with the Christian Right’s social conservatism. Environmentalism, because liberals tend to be more environmentalist-minded, is placed in the others’“evil” package. Coal is placed in the “good” category because it is endorsed and supported by the economic libertarians, who oppose any and all government regulations, environmental and otherwise. To these people, it literally becomes a matter of "If you oppose coal you are against capitalism and free enterprise." There is also the unrelated crossover, "If you are for solar power you are also for abortion."
People who hold liberal beliefs about economic and social issues contribute to and reinforce this “circle the wagons” mentality by bundling their own issues (support for abortion rights, gay marriage, environmentalism, support for social welfare, etc) into a package as well.
So, as I hope you can realize, in this context the terms “socialist” and “communist” do not have very much to do with either their self-definitions or the accepted textbook definitions of them. In this context "socialist" and "communist" (and a new post-911 addition "Muslim") are merely derogatory labels used to designate enemies.
Feel free to post your stuff.

Your name is stirring, stunning to some. I'm used to retired farmers like you.. LOL.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36965 Jul 13, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
I'm feeling Soso tonight.
Hope it worked for you .. LOL.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#36966 Jul 13, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
<quoted text>
When thinking about the definitions of “socialism” and “communism” among people like Coal is King forget how socialists or communists define their ideology and the textbook definitions. They are irrelevant and do not apply. Here the majority of the people’s worldview is basically theological, that is to say religious in nature. Everything is seen in clearly defined, absolute terms: black and white, good vs. evil. The Cold War instilled the idea that socialism/communism and evil are one in the same thing.
In a theological worldview it is God’s elect (us) vs. the damned sinners (everybody that is not us). People with this kind of worldview tend to bundle unrelated things into a package with their religious beliefs. Their political beliefs and religious beliefs become so intertwined that it is impossible to separate one from the other. If you admit that there is any legitimacy to the other side’s position on any one issue in the package, even though you may totally agree with all the other issues in the package, rejecting that one item is the same thing as rejecting the whole set of beliefs. You are an apostate.
In this case, right wing libertarian economics and minimalist government political philosophy has been bundled with the Christian Right’s social conservatism. Environmentalism, because liberals tend to be more environmentalist-minded, is placed in the others’“evil” package. Coal is placed in the “good” category because it is endorsed and supported by the economic libertarians, who oppose any and all government regulations, environmental and otherwise. To these people, it literally becomes a matter of "If you oppose coal you are against capitalism and free enterprise." There is also the unrelated crossover, "If you are for solar power you are also for abortion."
People who hold liberal beliefs about economic and social issues contribute to and reinforce this “circle the wagons” mentality by bundling their own issues (support for abortion rights, gay marriage, environmentalism, support for social welfare, etc) into a package as well.
So, as I hope you can realize, in this context the terms “socialist” and “communist” do not have very much to do with either their self-definitions or the accepted textbook definitions of them. In this context "socialist" and "communist" (and a new post-911 addition "Muslim") are merely derogatory labels used to designate enemies.
Good post. My take is that the Republicans had to buy the religious right's votes by incorporating their beliefs into their platform. The RR has yet to understand that they are being used by the Republicans. However, it is beginning to infringe upon the ability of the Republicans to find a moderate stance and hence causing them to lose stature. They are so tied to the RR that they cannot break free and have been defined by them. Either they will move to a mainstream platform or they will become marginalized.
JKX

Lehighton, PA

#36967 Jul 13, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Good post. My take is that the Republicans had to buy the religious right's votes by incorporating their beliefs into their platform. The RR has yet to understand that they are being used by the Republicans. However, it is beginning to infringe upon the ability of the Republicans to find a moderate stance and hence causing them to lose stature. They are so tied to the RR that they cannot break free and have been defined by them. Either they will move to a mainstream platform or they will become marginalized.
Neither socialism or communism are Constitutional.

“Let's X Change!!”

Level 4

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#36968 Jul 13, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
I'm feeling Soso tonight.
because youre to afraid to answer a simple direct question. guess your feelings go hand in hand with your hypocrisy, huh?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36969 Jul 13, 2013
JKX wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither socialism or communism are Constitutional.
Well there you go! Neither is Religion. God has no time for cross burners and extremism needs to find another symbol to hide behind. Christian is not one of them.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36970 Jul 13, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>To another:

because youre to afraid to answer a simple direct question. guess your feelings go hand in hand with your hypocrisy, huh?
hahahaha

SOSO, MS!

"to afraid" or what?????

Yours, HELL, WI???
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36971 Jul 13, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>because youre to afraid to answer a simple direct question. guess your feelings go hand in hand with your hypocrisy, huh?
No, it was a joke that went right by you.

My IP address was shown as Soso, MS.

What's your question? Is it a stupid one?
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36972 Jul 13, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>because youre to afraid to answer a simple direct question. guess your feelings go hand in hand with your hypocrisy, huh?
(B)because youre(') to(too) afraid to answer a simple(,) direct question.(?)(G)guess your feelings go hand in hand with your hypocrisy, huh?

Sloppy grammar and spelling, a sign of sloppy thinking.
Retired Farmer

Princeton, KY

#36973 Jul 13, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Good post. My take is that the Republicans had to buy the religious right's votes by incorporating their beliefs into their platform. The RR has yet to understand that they are being used by the Republicans. However, it is beginning to infringe upon the ability of the Republicans to find a moderate stance and hence causing them to lose stature. They are so tied to the RR that they cannot break free and have been defined by them. Either they will move to a mainstream platform or they will become marginalized.
Not exactly, but close. The Republican party -- that is the old Republican Party of Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, and Reagan -- reached out to the then fairly moderate Christian Right in the 1980s. That's how the Republicans managed to take over the South. For their part the Democrats, who dominated the South from the end of Reconstruction until the 1980s, went through a phase where they did the opposite of today's Republican move to the far right. After the Carter years, the Democrats moved too far to the left to keep the loyalty of religious rural people, not just in the South but also in the Plains states and Midwest.

At the same time, a small clique of wealthy libertarians who adhered to the economic thinking of Ludwig von Mises and Murray N. Rothbard, were trying to move Republican economic thinking to the right. They would never have had a chance except that a preacher, Gary North, came up with what he called "Christian" or "Biblical" economics that was pure libertarian laissez-faire Social Darwinist economics wrapped in Bible verses. North opposes all forms of welfare, even traditional Christian charity. In North's view, poor people are poor because of their evil and indolent ways. The televangelist Pat Robertson picked North's ideas up, sanitized them, and popularized them by associating them with the traditional Puritan work ethic.

Libertarians and the Christian Right then reached an unlikely compromise. The wealthy Libertarians, who care most about economics, sacrificed their ideas about human freedom to the Christian Right's "moral" issues. The Christian Right sacrificed its traditional views about charity, social responsibility, and social justice to the Libertarians economics.

The two allies then hijacked the Republican Party -- the Christian Right working at the grass roots and the rich libertarians from the top down.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Orlando Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min woodtick57 1,216,848
Inspiration Lane - Don't Quit (May '09) 19 min Murph 71,657
Food & Decor 4 Mother's Day 20 min vib_ram 3
Does Anyone Shop at Whole Foods? 22 min vib_ram 21
Let's Chat (Jan '12) 25 min LizW 18,035
Scripted Narcissistic Duggars Need to Get Off R... 31 min vib_ram 15
News Jewish Museum turns 20 53 min vib_ram 24
More from around the web

Orlando People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]