Donate!
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register :: View Members
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 
Send Topic Print
Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations? (Read 525 times)
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #90 - 03/15/19 at 10:43:52
 
something we all agree on, we don't want a crony corporatist government, right?

crony corporatist government - a government that's loyal only to corporations, of which the bigger company, the more power they have on the government

right? or am I reaching too far?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
MnSpring
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

Younger than most
people my age.

Posts: 5013
Minn
Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #91 - 03/15/19 at 15:00:21
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/15/19 at 10:43:52:
something we all agree on, we don't want a crony corporatist government, right?
crony corporatist government - a government that's loyal only to corporations, of which the bigger company, the more power they have on the government
right? or am I reaching too far?

I’m thinking that, ‘Crooked’, people in government,
who have been, and are, doing the, crony corporatist government.
Are the people that WANT, and are striving for,
the continuance of, the crony corporatist government.

Wanting Non Citizens to vote.
Wanting 16 year olds to vote.
Wanting No Border control.
Wanting, Government to control your life.

Back to top
 
 

Ben Franklin once said: "If you give up a freedom, for the sake of security, you will have neither".
Which is More TRUE, today, than yesterday.('06, S-40, Stock) well, mostly .
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #92 - 03/15/19 at 15:42:21
 
MnSpring wrote on 03/15/19 at 15:00:21:
LostArtist wrote on 03/15/19 at 10:43:52:
something we all agree on, we don't want a crony corporatist government, right?
crony corporatist government - a government that's loyal only to corporations, of which the bigger company, the more power they have on the government
right? or am I reaching too far?

I’m thinking that, ‘Crooked’, people in government,
who have been, and are, doing the, crony corporatist government.
Are the people that WANT, and are striving for,
the continuance of, the crony corporatist government.

Wanting Non Citizens to vote. - how does this contribute to a government corrupted by corporations???
Wanting 16 year olds to vote. . - how does this contribute to a government corrupted by corporations???
Wanting No Border control. . - how does this contribute to a government corrupted by corporations???
Wanting, Government to control your life. . - is government, in America at least, supposed to be WE THE PEOPLE?  so if WE THE PEOPLE aren't controlling our lives.... who do you want to to control your life?


Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #93 - 03/15/19 at 16:22:52
 
notice how not once, did Eegore or anyone say something along the lines of:

Citizenship is more than an arbitrary place of birth, it's close to a guarantee  of at least exposure to a shared set of experiences (education, culture, community, whatever....) for 18 years...  well, where only like 7 of that might you be even remotely aware of what the culture around you is doing, but at least you're getting some of that through osmosis of exposure via your parents, family, community, shopping, etc.... so, you are at least somewhat indoctrinated in American values...  and that adds value to your voice to contribute to our governance as a nation.....  

After all, isn't that what citizenship classes  and tests try to mimic in at least some way?  

Isn't that the point of requiring years of residency BEFORE taking the citizenship test?  

yet no mention of any of this in any of Eegore's rebutals to me, just asking the same questions again and again and again about what do I mean when I say resident...  and the harassment he disguises and "clarification."  


come on y'all!  

that being said, I don't have a problem with undocumented immigrants who have proof of residency (however that is to be defined by a local government) being able to vote where they live in local elections.  maybe even up to state level.... idk about national elections yet, but let's be clear, you all call them foreigners...  I call them neighbors....

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
MnSpring
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

Younger than most
people my age.

Posts: 5013
Minn
Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #94 - 03/15/19 at 17:33:16
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/15/19 at 16:22:52:
I don't have a problem with undocumented immigrants who have proof of residency ... being able to vote

I and Many others,
do have a problem with,
Non Citizens voting.
Back to top
 
 

Ben Franklin once said: "If you give up a freedom, for the sake of security, you will have neither".
Which is More TRUE, today, than yesterday.('06, S-40, Stock) well, mostly .
  IP Logged
Eegore
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 2402

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #95 - 03/15/19 at 21:01:13
 
notice how not once, did Eegore or anyone say something along the lines of:

Citizenship is more than an arbitrary place of birth


 I would have no reason to say that as I do not think it is true.

"just asking the same questions again and again and again about what do I mean when I say resident...  "

 I wouldn't have to ask more than once if you would answer the first time.

 You outline Amendments that clearly indicate "citizen" attempting to apply it to people who aren't.  You bring up sales taxes, after I already clarified that sales tax was included.  Then you outline equal importance of sales tax even when I did not say it was less important.  Those among others are responses that did not answer what you think a resident vs a citizen in the US is.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #96 - 03/16/19 at 19:40:28
 
MnSpring wrote on 03/15/19 at 17:33:16:
LostArtist wrote on 03/15/19 at 16:22:52:
I don't have a problem with undocumented immigrants who have proof of residency ... being able to vote

I and Many others,
do have a problem with,
Non Citizens voting.


cause???  again you see them as foreigners, while I see them as neighbors, what's the difference between an 18 year old kid and an undocumented immigrant who's been here 18 years  and can pass a citizenship test ?  
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #97 - 03/16/19 at 19:53:55
 
Eegore wrote on 03/15/19 at 21:01:13:
notice how not once, did Eegore or anyone say something along the lines of:

Citizenship is more than an arbitrary place of birth


 I would have no reason to say that as I do not think it is true.

so to you, citizenship is just a matter of birthplace, an accident of birth


"just asking the same questions again and again and again about what do I mean when I say resident...  "

 I wouldn't have to ask more than once if you would answer the first time.

I'm not sure how you confuse the word resident with citizen...  sounds like that's a personal problem


 You outline Amendments that clearly indicate "citizen" attempting to apply it to people who aren't.  You bring up sales taxes, after I already clarified that sales tax was included.  Then you outline equal importance of sales tax even when I did not say it was less important.  Those among others are responses that did not answer what you think a resident vs a citizen in the US is.


NOT AT ALL, all those amendment say what you CAN'T do to citizens of certain requirement, THEY DO NOT SAY WHAT YOU CAN ALLOW NON-CITIZENS TO DO.  it's unconstitutional to require a citizen to take a literacy test, or pay a poll tax, etc... it is not unconstitutional to require a non-citizen to take a  literacy test or even a citizenship test before they can vote.  

now it is illegal for non-citizens to vote, but not based on the constitution oh, and that law was passed in 1996...  even though all states banned it since 1926

"Since enactment of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, federal law has prohibited noncitizens from voting in federal elections, punishing them by fines, imprisonment, inadmissibility and deportation.[3][4][5] Exempt from punishment is any noncitizen who "reasonably believed at the time of voting (...) that he or she was a citizen of the United States," had a parent who is or was a citizen and began permanently living in the United States before turning 16 years old.[3] The federal law does not prohibit noncitizens from voting in state or local elections, but no state has allowed noncitizens to vote in state elections since Arkansas became the last state to outlaw noncitizen voting in 1926.[6]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_foreigners_to_vote_in_the_United_States

and let's be clear, a citizen, as stated quite a few times in this thread, is someone born here by mere accident of their parents being here (you don't choose your relatives, etc...)  and as recently expanded, "Citizenship is more than an arbitrary place of birth, it's close to a guarantee  of at least exposure to a shared set of experiences (education, culture, community, whatever....)..."  

if you're confused about what 2 different words mean.... you have access to the internet and to dictionaries....

you're working awful hard to suppress democracy....  



Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #98 - 03/18/19 at 10:20:58
 
a thought:

This thread took a tangent from talking about the differences in "socialism" to democracy and voting...  and originally, arguing over who gets to vote seems fairly semantic.  

To me, I think the underlying idea of democracy is that people, the average person deserves some kind of say in how they are governed.  And sure, you can argue about well, what conditions you want to put on those people, citizenship, property ownership, etc....   but isn't putting those conditions on voting, doesn't that lend itself more to what conservatives are so afraid of about "socialism?"   This idea that only these people are qualified....  doesn't that sound like it leads to a path of limited involvement, less say...  and the smaller a group of governing people, isn't that the path towards authoritarianism? the path towards Venezuela and Cuba....  towards dictatorship? '

and maybe that's why there are 2  different interpretations of "socialism."  You'll notice Bernie and his progressive followers always say "Democratic Socialism."  and Conservatives don't seem to hear that first part, the Democratic, part, cause they don't really like democracy....  as shown by this last few elections, they suppress the vote, want only people with skin in the game to vote, etc... so to them, yeah, if we start going down the "socialist" path, we'll end up like Venezuela, despite our many, many, many differences in almost every area..., While progressives, want to expand the vote, to give power to more and more people, to dillute the power of the rich at the top, yes, redistribute wealth...  etc...  

well, thanks for participating in this thought experiment...  and yes, some things are overstated... so let's not get too hung up on what anyone here actually believes in this thread, it's just some thoughts
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
MnSpring
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

Younger than most
people my age.

Posts: 5013
Minn
Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #99 - 03/18/19 at 14:36:12
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/16/19 at 19:40:28:
what's the difference between an 18 year old kid and an undocumented immigrant who's been here 18 years  and can pass a citizenship test ?  

Could be a VAST difference between them.
Or they could be very much alike.

As far as voting,
If your, ' can pass', means Not a Citizen.
And '18 year old kid', means a Citizen.
One, IS, a Citizen, the other is NOT a Citizen.

If your, 'can pass', means that person DID take the citizenship test, and passed.

Then, (as far as Voting) no difference.

Back to top
 
 

Ben Franklin once said: "If you give up a freedom, for the sake of security, you will have neither".
Which is More TRUE, today, than yesterday.('06, S-40, Stock) well, mostly .
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #100 - 03/18/19 at 14:48:56
 
[quote author=7D5E634042595E57300 link=1552324236/90#99 date=1552944972]LostArtist wrote on 03/16/19 at 19:40:28:
what's the difference between an 18 year old kid and an undocumented immigrant who's been here 18 years  and can pass a citizenship test ?  

Could be a VAST difference between them.
Or they could be very much alike.

As far as voting,
If your, ' can pass', means Not a Citizen.
And '18 year old kid', means a Citizen.
One, IS, a Citizen, the other is NOT a Citizen.

If your, 'can pass', means that person DID take the citizenship test, and passed.

Then, (as far as Voting) no difference.


oh, and can pass, means they have the knowledge needed to pass, not that they qualify to even take the test legally...

yeah, and if you think the accident of your birthplace makes you more qualified to have a voice or say in your governance, than you're a silly silly human being.....

spelling all this out for you all is getting a bit tedious.... did anyone teach you all how to think critically???  
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
MnSpring
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

Younger than most
people my age.

Posts: 5013
Minn
Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #101 - 03/18/19 at 15:31:47
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/18/19 at 14:48:56:
 than you're a silly silly human being.....  

Rather simple.
Each country has established a criteria for being a citizen.

Each country has established a criteria as to who can vote.

A Person is a Citizen of a Country, or not.

If one is not, each Country has a established way to become a Citizen.

In the US, if a Person, SNEAKS in,
that person is not a Citizen.

The only, 'silly' I see,
is a Person, Sneaking', in, and expecting to Vote.



Back to top
 
 

Ben Franklin once said: "If you give up a freedom, for the sake of security, you will have neither".
Which is More TRUE, today, than yesterday.('06, S-40, Stock) well, mostly .
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #102 - 03/18/19 at 16:06:29
 
MnSpring wrote on 03/18/19 at 15:31:47:
LostArtist wrote on 03/18/19 at 14:48:56:
 than you're a silly silly human being.....  

Rather simple.
Each country has established a criteria for being a citizen.

Each country has established a criteria as to who can vote.

yes and I'd be open to looking at changing those criteria, that's all I'm saying here, this is a THOUGHT EXPERIMENT... do you comprehend?????  

A Person is a Citizen of a Country, or not.

If one is not, each Country has a established way to become a Citizen.

In the US, if a Person, SNEAKS in,
that person is not a Citizen.

The only, 'silly' I see,
is a Person, Sneaking', in, and expecting to Vote.





well, no one is really doing, that, not really, do you understand "THOUGHT EXPERIMENT'????    

do you understand that I don't think the accident of your birthplace, really means much??  if a non-citizen can pass a voting test then why not let them vote? if they also have established residency (and I'm open to making that a long term, 5 years, 8 years maybe... ) . this idea that you're special because your momma gave birth to you on American soil?  

why is that ACCIDENT so sacred to you?


Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 8229

Gender: male
Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #103 - 03/19/19 at 04:39:09
 
LostArtist wrote on 03/18/19 at 10:20:58:
a thought:

This thread took a tangent from talking about the differences in "socialism" to democracy and voting...  and originally, arguing over who gets to vote seems fairly semantic.  

To me, I think the underlying idea of democracy is that people, the average person deserves some kind of say in how they are governed.  And sure, you can argue about well, what conditions you want to put on those people, citizenship, property ownership, etc....   but isn't putting those conditions on voting, doesn't that lend itself more to what conservatives are so afraid of about "socialism?"

No, I don't think so Lost. I would say look at a household family. When the kids are young, they have no say so in how the household is run. However, as they get older and demonstrate some type of understanding of ramification of one's decisions, they get to weigh in on decisions that affect them. As they get older and 'wiser', they add more input. For example, we had a chance to move for a job when my son was 4. He had no input. We had a chance to move again when he was 9 and in school. Again, he had no input but we weighed his well being into the decision. At 12, we had another opportunity and again we took his well being into account and asked for his input. He didn't get a vote, but he weighed in with his opinion. That's how a society should work. No, everyone doesn't get to vote, only the ones who demonstrate "ownership" of the nation. 16 year olds don't have enough life experiences to vote, non-citizens who broke in don't get to vote, felons who committed violent crimes, financial crimes etc.. give up that right.  

  This idea that only these people are qualified....  doesn't that sound like it leads to a path of limited involvement, less say...  and the smaller a group of governing people, isn't that the path towards authoritarianism? the path towards Venezuela and Cuba....  towards dictatorship? '

No, it's the opposite. It relies on those most able to formulate their own opinion.

and maybe that's why there are 2  different interpretations of "socialism."  You'll notice Bernie and his progressive followers always say "Democratic Socialism."  and Conservatives don't seem to hear that first part, the Democratic, part, cause they don't really like democracy....  as shown by this last few elections, they suppress the vote, want only people with skin in the game to vote, etc... so to them, yeah, if we start going down the "socialist" path, we'll end up like Venezuela, despite our many, many, many differences in almost every area..., While progressives, want to expand the vote, to give power to more and more people, to dillute the power of the rich at the top, yes, redistribute wealth...  etc...  

well, thanks for participating in this thought experiment...  and yes, some things are overstated... so let's not get too hung up on what anyone here actually believes in this thread, it's just some thoughts


Thank you for the post and interesting responses Lost. Clearly we are on opposite ends here but it was a useful exchange at the end.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
LostArtist
Serious Thumper
*****
Offline

SuzukiSavage.com
Rocks!

Posts: 1069

Re: Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?
Reply #104 - 03/19/19 at 08:19:31
 
WebsterMark wrote on 03/19/19 at 04:39:09:
LostArtist wrote on 03/18/19 at 10:20:58:
a thought:

This thread took a tangent from talking about the differences in "socialism" to democracy and voting...  and originally, arguing over who gets to vote seems fairly semantic.  

To me, I think the underlying idea of democracy is that people, the average person deserves some kind of say in how they are governed.  And sure, you can argue about well, what conditions you want to put on those people, citizenship, property ownership, etc....   but isn't putting those conditions on voting, doesn't that lend itself more to what conservatives are so afraid of about "socialism?"

No, I don't think so Lost. I would say look at a household family. When the kids are young, they have no say so in how the household is run. However, as they get older and demonstrate some type of understanding of ramification of one's decisions, they get to weigh in on decisions that affect them. As they get older and 'wiser', they add more input. For example, we had a chance to move for a job when my son was 4. He had no input. We had a chance to move again when he was 9 and in school. Again, he had no input but we weighed his well being into the decision. At 12, we had another opportunity and again we took his well being into account and asked for his input. He didn't get a vote, but he weighed in with his opinion. That's how a society should work. No, everyone doesn't get to vote, only the ones who demonstrate "ownership" of the nation. 16 year olds don't have enough life experiences to vote, non-citizens who broke in don't get to vote, felons who committed violent crimes, financial crimes etc.. give up that right.  

how does an 18 year old with no job, living at home, obsessed with the Kardashians, Basketball and pizza have "ownership of the nation?"  vs a 30 year old who at age 19 decided to take their hard earned money and move to America and has worked, paid at least sales tax, participated in a vast exercise of personal responsibility, (taking the risk and all upon themselves to come here to better their lives) this person CHOSE to come here, taking very little for granted, has shown an interest in America, enough to pass a voting test of some kind not taken "ownership of this nation?"

  This idea that only these people are qualified....  doesn't that sound like it leads to a path of limited involvement, less say...  and the smaller a group of governing people, isn't that the path towards authoritarianism? the path towards Venezuela and Cuba....  towards dictatorship? '

No, it's the opposite. It relies on those most able to formulate their own opinion.

so you feel only an special select few (those that are most able to formulate their own opinion, judged by you of course) should be given that power..... do they get an extra vote?  


and maybe that's why there are 2  different interpretations of "socialism."  You'll notice Bernie and his progressive followers always say "Democratic Socialism."  and Conservatives don't seem to hear that first part, the Democratic, part, cause they don't really like democracy....  as shown by this last few elections, they suppress the vote, want only people with skin in the game to vote, etc... so to them, yeah, if we start going down the "socialist" path, we'll end up like Venezuela, despite our many, many, many differences in almost every area..., While progressives, want to expand the vote, to give power to more and more people, to dillute the power of the rich at the top, yes, redistribute wealth...  etc...  

well, thanks for participating in this thought experiment...  and yes, some things are overstated... so let's not get too hung up on what anyone here actually believes in this thread, it's just some thoughts


Thank you for the post and interesting responses Lost. Clearly we are on opposite ends here but it was a useful exchange at the end.

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 
Send Topic Print


« Home

 
« Home
SuzukiSavage.com
05/19/19 at 07:37:24



General CategoryPolitics, Religion (Tall Table) › Socialism.... Why 2 different interpretations?


SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2!
YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved.