Sabcat

Socialism is evil change my mind live stream


https://youtu.be/xF2lFGyADtM

Kode

I'm not listening to an hour and 45 minutes of stupidity parading around. If you think a valid point was make in that video and you want to discuss it, go ahead and post the words to begin the discussion.

xMathFanx

@Sabcat

Depends how it is defined, on what scale, and what the proposed method is to bring it about. I have briefly discussed what I mean by that before on DTT, and can elaborate if necessary. I will watch the video, as I like Crowder and get back with further thoughts later when I see the context.

To my understanding, it is the notion of 'Concept Creep' run amok--as the original intention was quite sensible, really (in many cases). Note, people who call themselves 'socialist' today are overwhelmingly significantly out-of-step with those who originated the movement (as often happens)--and I agree are often very dangerous, unethical, etc.

Camelot

Socialism is natural. People make up a society. To think that people will not socialize is really foolish. Every government and every economy throughout world history has had socialistic tendencies by default. The struggle between the power of the wealthy vs. the disempowered will always exist until the end of time. This black and white vision of humanity is the foolish crap of Ayn Rand and anyone ignorant enough to follow a theoretical impossibility.

iolo

If Sabcat hasn't changed his mind by now it is because nobody thinks his original is worth having.

Camelot

I wonder how he would classify the American taxpayer paying to clean up Super Fund pollution sites left behind by greedy corporations ? Capitalism ?

Clara007

Sabcat is like Trump. Trump (and Sab) can make a statement so outrageous--so flamboyantly untrue--then double down on the statement as detractors present contradictory evidence.

It doesn't matter HOW appalling the statement--Sabcat will stand by it. Apologies are seen as weakness...and we certainly can't have that, can we?

Clara007

We have been through this argument so many times it's nauseating. Here's the bottom line. The Party of NO says NO--over and over and over. They do not see any benefit to the parts of our society that are NOW and always HAVE been part of the socialism template.

Public education? They aren't paying for someone else's kid. Public libraries? They aren't paying for someone to read their books. National/public Parks? Sell them. Police and Fire? Privatize them. Infrastructure? Leave it to the states. Social Security/Medicare: Throw them out. Public transportation? Get a car.
The military?? Who needs 'em. Social programs? Pppffft! ONLY the strong survive.

Camelot

Agreed, but at the same time they endorse socialistic behavior by the government toward corporate america.

Sabcat

I posted this to share the video. I wasn't expecting to get an honest debate on the subject. This is easily one of my favorite subjects but we have tried to have it here a hundred times and it always comes down to stop signs and candy bars. During the campaigns and so many people got the sanders STD it was infectious but you nailed it on the head. What socialism is must be defined from the start. This is an issue w/ forms such as this. So many people do not even understand the basic debate concepts. So it turns into a shit show. There are so many different ideas of what socialism and communism are and everyone chimes in when no real premise has been set. It ends up "oh, you hate stop signs and candy bars?"