padremike wrote:
As I said previously:
"Everytime you open your mouth you give a great example of what a sick, demented, perverted bastard thinks."
You couldn't have proven me more right than by your last commentary.
You may be glib and arrogant and full of yourself, Nimrod, you may laugh, giggle and blow snot bubbles at the old standards of Godly mortality of right and wrong. Your little "g" god may tell you that his or her concept of love and freedom are sincere and genuine and to party to the fullest, "panem et circenses". Then why is it that throughout history your sort, your philosophy and agenda always lose but not before you cause untold human misery. Your arrogance blinds you to the glaring truth of the slavery to sin and decadence your sort of freedom causes. You're a bloody fool and I rest my case.
As I said previously: br br "Everytime you o... (
show quote)
OK, well... first, I'm gonna compliment you on your poetic approach to insulting me. I'm being serious btw "laugh, giggle and blow snot bubbles"... Awesome.
Now let me just respond to your thing about "my sort". I'm assuming that's a reference to a nebulous category of philosophers and ministers that you don't agree with, probably associated with the "left", progressive policies, socialist economics, secularism, stuff like that.
I'm wondering why you think these systems have failed.
First of all the largest socialist system in world history is currently thriving as an integral part of the US. We are a hybrid economy (heavy on the free-market). And yet, our socialist components are massive.
Secondly, every other developed nation in the G7 is also a hybrid economy. Socialism is what turned the iron of 19th century capitalism into the steel of a hybrid economy, which is what we mostly see today.
Socialism didn't fail... Some of it's implementations did; Russia being one such example. But even Marx would have told Lenin, "dude, you guys aren't ready" (but in a German Accent). Marx was very clear about allowing capitalism to thrive and develop first, THEN socialism, THEN communism. Russia went from agrarian to communist in one revolution... oops. Same for China. Not that it mattered because dudes like Stalin were just assholes anyway; They were just using the revolution to push their own agenda and that's what makes it such a bad example. Which is why the free-market fanatics keep using it.
One final thing on that... The prevailing conclusion across many recent studies show that Americans are not as happy as the Northern Europeans are. Standards of living are actually quite lower in the US and stress is elevated. Hence the running joke about Trump saying he wants people from "nice" countries like Denmark...
As if they would want to come here. But here's my point... All of those Scandinavian countries which btw, TOP the lists are like us... they run on hybrid economies but... (heavier on the socialism). Not National Socialism, Democratic Socialism... Massive difference... think - Evangelist vs Roman Catholic. Democratic socialists were the ones that Hitler had executed.
To me this is what matters... Happiness is the bottom line and migration patterns tell us where the happy places are. We have migrants knocking at our door, or maybe jumping our fences BECAUSE we are a happier place, BECAUSE we have socialist parts in our engine AND because we are on the way to Canada, which is even a happier place with more socialist parts in their engine. In Europe... it's the same thing - different continent.
As for progressive politics, that will always be resisted by cultures that feel threatened by social change, but it will also be the most reliable ally for the worker well into the future. BTW, those northern countries are very progressive as well. I don't see a failure here either. Some setbacks perhaps with encroachments from a more aggressive alt-right in recent years, but certainly not a failure.
Of course, the American Left, is intermeshed with socialism and progressive policy because they give workers a greater share of the value they create and because they try to break social barriers between workers and jobs.
But the left by virtue of it's principle of inclusion, also invites the immigrants. So it's critical that they be assimilated into the hybrid economy quickly so that they can produce value (work) as soon as they take value (receive handouts). The problem is that the right, by virtue of their principal of exclusion, tries to obstruct this process and it's when immigrants get stuck in the middle of this tug-of-war that they become a drain.
In any case, the left can't fail anymore than the right can. These are not systems, these are human biases.