arkrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Nalod wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Nalod wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:Name one country in the world in the last couple of hundred years that mirrors what you are looking for so we can study it and see how it operates and how it came to be.

The thing that came closest is the form of capitalism originally advocated by John Maynard Keynes. Keynes understood that for capitalism to work you would required solid social safety nets - universal income, education and healthcare. This was only partially implemented giving birth to social security and medicare and rather badly botched at the source. Again because it had to be constructed via compromise with those who would fight it at every step. In US history it's know as the "new deal" which literally saved capitalism from it's demise and ushered in what is known as the golden age of capitalism early 60s thru mid 70s. Even the badly executed version was able to engender the creation of a solid and vibrant middle class. All western democracies adopted this but then most of them got corrupted by the advent of militarized plunder known as neoliberalism. That was championed by Milton Friedman and the Chicago school of Economics. Only a few countries still have remnants of the new deal system - like Sweden.

Understand, that I am not asking for another new deal, I could see myself supporting the real thing proposed by Keynes. And no I have no love for capitalism, but the data shows it can work and it did for a period of time, right here in the US.

I admire your enthusiasm. Perhaps when I was younger I would have thought similar. I studied economics and ideals that are unfortunately not implemented for a host of reasons. I could drone on and on about why these ideals don’t as they do in the small Nordic region of Northern Europe. In fact, I prefer you keep pushing it forward. One day this system might burst at the scenes and we’ll need you to promote.
We are a fearful nation which I fear leads us to tilt more to a nationalist right movement and the ugly underbelly that comes with it.

This isn't enthusiasm, it's my philosophy. I am not a supporter of any type of capitalism but I think this is the form of governance/economic system most likely to work here.
I do think Neoliberal dogma is pervasive in our schools/colleges and that is what they teach us - Certain ideals are not possible in the US, Capitalism is a free market system, the actors are always acting in rational self interest, the market always auto-corrects inefficiencies blah blah blah. About 85% of our population has been farm raised on this propaganda- kind of he point of the animation I posted above. Your droning on would be welcome conversation - please do so, by all means.

How old are you? not being snarky, it matters.
"I admire your enthusiasm for your Philosphy"..........Is that better?

I am a year from being 50, how about you? I am a lot more enthusiastic about my actual political positions, this falls into the half-hearted support categories. I think it will work, but it's still capitalism.

Looks like we are in the same age segment.
I know you do not like to talk with me or with any person for that matter who experienced the best shot at Socialism and witnessed first hand how it miserably failed in reality.
Especially as you and absolute majority of US leftists never experienced any of this.
Socialism inevitably leads to totalitarian society, destruction of basic human rights, militarism, imperialism, aggression, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
And so leaving society destroyed and progress reversed by decades and centuries.
This happens again and again in many countries and still people never learn.
How many millions of people need to be reduced to bricks in the wall of state and killed to make this clear?
It always started by intellectuals with great intention but then when it became clear that this can work only by bending the human nature the "practical" people take over.
And this intellectuals are first to be extinct by them.

arkrud wrote:I know you do not like to talk with me or with any person for that matter who experienced the best shot at Socialism and witnessed first hand how it miserably failed in reality.
Especially as you and absolute majority of US leftists never experienced any of this.
Socialism inevitably leads to totalitarian society, destruction of basic human rights, militarism, imperialism, aggression, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
And so leaving society destroyed and progress reversed by decades and centuries.
This happens again and again in many countries and still people never learn.
How many millions of people need to be reduced to bricks in wall of state and killed to make this clear?
It always started by intellectuals with great intention but then when it became clear that this can work only by bending the human nature the "practical" people take over.
And this intellectuals are first to be extinct by them.

Is that one form of bad socialism and can it be auto associated with every other country out there?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/sunday/progressive-capitalism.amp.html

If further interested i loved his latest book:

https://www.amazon.com/People-Power-Profits-Progressive-Capitalism/dp/1324004215

newyorknewyork wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

What you are asking for is, if I may paraphrase, "When will a tsunami sized 3rd party voting block appear that will instantly vote out all corporate interests". You asking the wrong question and only looking at one path with blinders on while negating the realistics of what is in front of you. Sure, going from Point A to Point B is a straight line but if the road is super curved and bends way out of the direct line, sometimes you gotta take it to get to where you want to go.

I guess that means you won't acknowledge that the last 50 years of voting them out didn't work?

Incremental gains? Incremental gains get wiped out the next voting cycle.

And the above bolded could not be more wrong. I have no hope or secret wish for a Bernie takeover or third party - they would get corrupted or castrated by the same corporate elite. I am more interested in rejecting paths that I know don't work and then seeing what's left. You on the other hand are clinging to a path, that leads to abject miserable failure over and over again. Look at AOC now supporting "blue no matter who" - so basically she is going to sheepdog her supporters into voting for that carcass of a spineless jellyfish that used to be our vice president. The system always wins. They system is rigged, the rules are made by the ones who own it - you can't beat them at their own game when you play by their rules (Ask Bernie Sanders circa 2016). It doesn't work that way.

While you make some good points. You understand why she is doing so right? GOP is united using Trump's cult like following to maintain power. She is only supporting blue no matter who in order to combat that. Any other route and Trump stays in office. So I understand this decision from her. I doubt that she will be blindly supporting all of Biden's policy if he were to get in office though. Just because he is a Democrat. I am very sure she would to be openly critical of him.

Not voting isn't going to shut down the system or even hurt the elite. No matter how little the votes, the process will still be in place. AOC getting voted into office beating out Crowley did rattle cages amoung the Democratic party though. American Revolution, Civil War or Boston Tea party type of event isn't realistically going to happen in this day and age. It's not muskets vs muskets today with no internet & technology. The revolution would need to be people getting informed about politics and voting in the AOC types that fit their needs accross the US. Which is to happen every 2 years. And if AOC isn't holding her end of the bargin than she is up for re-election soon, and then again in 2 years after that. Only when politicians understand that their careers are acutally in jeopardy unless they represent the people will change happen. Big buisness is all over it, which is why their interst have always come first. The ramifications and accountability from the general public has been lacking.

But AOC showed that Crowley who was supposed to be next in line for Pelosi's seat can be beaten out. Even without the backing of big buisness or deeply rooted polictical connections. Guys like Lindsey Graham(64 yrs old, been in Senate since 2003) and Mitch McConnell(78 yrs old been in the Senate since 1984) are both up for reelection this yr. People of Kentucky and South Carolina have the opportunity to vote them out. Given the amount of power Mcconnell has wielded when holding or not holding President accountable for his actions. That is one area that should change. Should be maybe up to more than just Kentucky to decide that.

I understand and don't accept why she is doing what she is doing. I also didn't accept the choice between Trump and Hillary either. My point is those that succumb to the system using this type of rationalization are never going to be able to overcome the system. I don't buy she will be able to mount a viable challenge to Biden's policies - because a new enemy or crisis can invented at will, and the same fallacy of it's us against them can be presented at each vote. Is she going to vote to end the livelihood of coal miners or to save the environment? I think you guys see what I am saying? All our choices are from within he same corrupt system and presented as binary. No one is willing to do anything outside of that and when they do they get shutdown (Sanders, 2016).

I totally disagree about your second paragraph. Civil disobedience can and does happen in this day and age. We just don't have leaders to do it. You are already setting up arguments for why it would fail - which is defeatist mindset. Take climate change as an example - for years we are told we can't unplug from fossil fuel and they keep selling hummers. There has been zero leadership and a bunch of dog-whistle policy making with carbon trading and green energy. "Renewable energy" relies heavily on fossil fuels - from car battery manufacturing to blades for windmills, and most of these products cannot be recycled like solar panels. This is how our one party system reacts to crises. By creating more products to sell and more ways to profit from it. One 16 year old Swedish girl did more to bring the fight for real climate change through civil disobedience than all the climate change savvy leaders of our country put together, think about it. An autistic child kick started a global movement by sitting out classes holding up a handmade cardboard sign. Before any of that, how would you have responded if someone asked you whether that would work? XR (eXtinction Rebellion) in UK arranges mass civil disobedience acts to force the dialogue on climate change. THAT is how you make more and more people politically aware. If they can do it why can't we?

AOC was backing and still backs Bernie, but if Biden were to beat Bernie out. Backing Biden to form a united front against Trump is the logical choice from the Democratic side, and Bernie stated he would do the same. And while Sanders was cheated in 2016, it has been the general public who have deserted him at this stage of the election in 2020. Biden is beating out Bernie because the people who set out to vote are the ones who put climate change on the back burner. The youth vote, who care about the future didn't show out. The older generation who care less about the future and more about todays survival showed out. The majority of the general public has not made climate change the priority it has needed to be by flooding the elected officials over the yrs with people of this mind set. But they are to protest in the streets for this not being a top priority? Trump got in office while openly denouncing climate change because the people whose jobs depend on it didn't care about climate change for the future. But how to feed their families this moment. So for all the people who will protest to make awareness of these issues. There will be regular people who will also protest the opposite if its more beneficial for them to do so for the present.

You are wrong about the defeatest attitude. Your views on how to fight are just different, but at the end of the day the goals are still the same. Establishing ramifications and accountability for the decision making of the people in positions of power. Someone like AOC getting elected was a form of protest. Trump getting elected was a form a protest. These were both out of the box, cage rattling elections.

This is the part I fully agree with:

Your views on how to fight are just different, but at the end of the day the goals are still the same. Establishing ramifications and accountability for the decision making of the people in positions of power. Someone like AOC getting elected was a form of protest. Trump getting elected was a form a protest. These were both out of the box, cage rattling elections.

Trump was a non-system candidate elected in protest of Obama's betrayal of the people. AOC probably elected in response to Trump's betrayal - don't you see this is why it doesn't work? They'll always betray us because they have to play by the rules of the system that is corrupt and owned by oligarchs? And some of them like Trump are more corrupt than the system even if they don't play by any rules.

I honestly don't think Bernie is that much of a better choice at this point and I am not rooting for him (I did in 2016). I don't however buy this MSM talking point about youth not showing up to vote - the game is rigged in every possible way. In 2020 MSM has continuously questioned Bernie's feasibility as a candidate when he was beating everybody. Do you hear them question Biden's feasibility? This creepy dude that has been accused of sexually assaulting women? How much negative coverage is Creepy, gropy Joe getting? Compared to "socialist" Bernie? You are discounting the impact of the last primary on Bernie voters - who got the message that no matter what, he would be made to lose. Lots of people from Obama to Pelosi came out and said that as well in 2020 - we will make sure Dems are not represented by a socialist. Does that have possibly have something to do with why they are not coming out? Just saying.

But I am not interested in Bernie vs. Biden, you are right in that I am interested in a different way of approaching this. I want to see this oligarchy and this one party system brought to it's knees and replaced with something else, my preference would be democratic socialism. And to do that the perfect leader will come from outside the political system just like Greta did for environmental issues. And yes there will always opposition to anything - half of the country fought to preserve how slavery benefited them, since when has that been a reason to not overcome status quo? I don't what this will take, I can't read the future, but I can read the past and I do know it ain't voting.

If the same efforts you desire through protest and civil war were actually put towards voting than it would effect government. But there just hasn't been that level of consistent effort at the ballot election after election. Or follow up on policies passed by the elected officials once in office, or accountability towards those policies. Big business though is on it for every single step. Not just for Presidents, but all branches required to be elected. Which is why Congress men and women comfortably stay in office for 30+ yrs while advancing their own self interest. 55.7% of voting age population actually voted in 2016 Presidential election though. Or 44.3% of the voting age population didn't vote. And other than Obama's first yr(08) which 58.2% actually voted. From the 70s until now 49%-55% have been the common turn out. I was speaking with a co-worker who is in his 60s. Says he never voted a day in his life. My younger brother 26 only voted once for Obama in 08. Close to 50% of the population haven't been giving themselves a real voice on issues for 44 years(1972-2016).

In the 2018 mid terms which AOC, Sharice Davids, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Deb Haaland were elected.

Voter turnout went up more in some groups than others from 2014 to 2018:

-Among 18 to 29-year-olds, voter turnout went from 20 percent in 2014 to 36 percent in 2018, the largest percentage point increase for any age group — a 79 percent jump.
-Among men and women, voter turnout increased by 11 and 12 percentage points respectively.
-Voter turnout increased among non-Hispanic Asians by 13 percentage points, a 49 percent increase.
-Among Hispanics, voter turnout increased by 13 percentage points, a 50 percent increase in Hispanic voter turnout.
-Non-Hispanic black voter turnout increased by 11 percentage points.
-Those with higher levels of education had higher levels of voter turnout in 2018. Those with less than a high school education had the smallest increase in voter turnout (5 ---
percentage points). Those with a high school diploma or equivalent had the second-lowest increase (8 percentage points).
-Voting by native-born and naturalized citizens both increased by 12 percentage points. This increase is not significantly different between native-born and naturalized citizens.
-Unlike the 2014 midterm election, voter turnout among those living in nonmetropolitan areas (up 8 points) was lower than for those living in metropolitan areas (up 12 points).

I am not following - how does voter turn out help beat the system? ALL the candidates take corporate sponsorship to run for office (OK maybe its 98.7% instead of 100%). You can have 100% voter turnout but you are still choosing best loser (least sociopathic) from the system approved choices. And whatever that choice is they are still going to create laws benefiting corporate elites. You are up against the nexus of corporations, politicians and MSM working with the shared interest of maintaining status quo.

True non-system candidates would have to fight corporate money, DNC power politics, other non system candidates and the MSM propaganda machine to have a ghost of a chance of winning the nomination for any race at any level, right? And that's before they even fight the actual election against the "other" party. Supposing all that was magically possible, how many total non system candidates would make it through those filters to state and national governments? 3-5% if we are really lucky? Then what? Are you sure this is the easier way to accomplish a system overhaul? Just do the math it won't/can't happen in a thousand years.

How many people you turn out to vote matters, what they have been constantly brainwashed with matters a lot more. Have you read Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky? If not please give it a try and also Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

Here's an animation that covers the salient features of Chomsky's central message in that book

Listen, if a movement started which was dedicated to changing the system to rig it more in the peoples favor. Giving us way more built in protections, reversing the course we are on with wage gaps & homelessness. I am all for it. But as you stated before, we would still rely on leadership. We will still rely on people who know how to play that game, but willing to sacrifice personal gain continuously. Even after achieving success and obtaining all the power and opportunities that comes with it. These elements are how the system became rigged for corporate interest in the first place.

We are talking about VERY different types of leaders here. You are talking about AOC who is a politician trying to fight the system through the aforementioned and failed mechanism of playing by the rules created by the owners of the system. I am talking about leadership from non system people - revolutionaries like Thunberg and XR or in a difference context MLK.

As we stand right now, no movement is mobilizing to form this, and people aren't voting enough and haven't been for decades to even truly gauge the impact of what voting could do. Though we have seen glimpses with Obama, Trump and AOC. And when I say voting its also about staying informed enough to ensure that the bills and laws being passed match what you were voting for. And applying the necessary pressure you are given with your future votes. 50% of the voting population doesn't vote for the POTUS, and most likely even less vote in the lead up. Out of that 50%, I can bet that 100% of corporate interest routinely vote and vote at every stage. Which is why they get to flood the pool with their candidates. If accurate that would mean that 100% of the 45-50% that don't vote are the regular joes. All who should be applying pressure to any candidate even thinking about running on any stage. To install the protections for the people stated above.

And what are the actual real life chances of the non voting 50% staying informed about the politics and the myriad complex issues and then forcing change through vote? Yes, when it gets toxic enough like under Bush/Cheney people came out one time to vote in Obama, and then they disappeared again. Ultimately you have to concede it is not possible for people to sustain interest in complex issues that don't directly concern them - and this is why democracy typically becomes a dog and pony show run by the elites. The "regular Joes" don't care how the economy runs, how banks create wealth for themselves or how they gamble with all the savings the Joes put in over their lifetimes. If you think otherwise - ask them. I do frequently. I asked the guy who came to fix my leaking kitchen faucet about his thoughts on the economy - he said he trusted Trump to do the right thing. That was it. That was the all the "staying informed" he cared to do. I asked my daughter's school teacher, she said the US economy was running fine and it's better than most countries, I asked her why more and more people are earning less and less she said that wasn't true. My coworker said Bernie's healthcare is not possible because it will cost more, I asked her how anything can cost more when you remove insurance companies and put limits of Pharama company price gouging - she had no idea what that even meant. You want these people to be informed - about derivatives trading? Okay, and??

I know you like to rag on Obama for bailing out corporations. That he wasn't extreme enough, which has all been valid critic of him. But at the same time. Did he not sign wall street reform consumer protection act? Tax the hell out of people who profited from capital gains? Sign into law to invest 90 billion dollars in green energy jobs? Sign in affordable care act to attempt to provide health insurance coverage to the masses? Sign an executive order to increase minimum wage for federal workers. In today's time the raise of minimum wage increase has been accepted by many states? Slowly defuse the "war on drugs" aka war on poc, signing the fair sentencing act? As well as shutting down private for profit prisons? Eventually leading to criminal justice reform bill & legalization of weed today. Politicians to gain support are now going after Cash Bail. These aren't corporate friendly policies. The way you speak on Obama though you would have people believe he did nothing for the common people and only pushed corporate agenda.

I don't want to make this about Obama - I rag on Clinton, Bush, Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Pelosi, Schumer, Cheney, McConnel - you name it, they are ALL neoliberals. But Obama comes up often because people always start these discussions with "the democrats only have one branch of Govt under control, so they can't do anything" - and Obama is the best and most recent example of how they didn't do anything when they had all three houses under control. So just this one time, I will respond to the points you made - but this discussion really isn't about him.

Wall street reform consumer protection act, aka DODD-FRANK tried to do this
-- The consolidation of regulatory agencies, elimination of the national thrift charter, and new oversight council to evaluate systemic risk
-- Comprehensive regulation of financial markets, including increased transparency of derivatives (bringing them onto exchanges)
-- Consumer protection reforms including a new consumer protection agency and uniform standards for "plain vanilla" products as well as strengthened investor protection

The main thrust was to keep banks from using savings deposits to trade derivatives(gmabling) - and the most important way to do that was the Volcker rule. The Volcker rule wasn't even included in the original bill but later added on in a weakened form where it essentially did nothing. You can look it up, too much to get into here. The consumer protection agency was basically completely paralyzed when Trump put Mulvaney in charge. The same well informed people(sic) voted Trump in.

Tax the hell out of people who benefit from capital gains - Not even CLOSE. Under Obama the long term capital gains tax went from 20% to a whopping 23.8%. It has been as high as 40% during the New Deal era. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Federal_Capital_Gains_Tax_Collections_1954-2009_history_chart.pdf

Sign into law 90 billion in green energy jobs - I have addressed differently above, the whole "renewable energy" game was created by the same elites. It was finding a way to divert funds into new products but it was still motivated by profit of fossil fuel, with lip service to the environment. Wind Turbine blades are made using fiberglas - which is in turn made using petroleum so the money went right back to the oil industry. The poles are manufactured from recycled steel - look up how steel is recycled, yup you guessed massive energy requirements provided by fossil fuel. Car batteries have long been shown to have massive carbon footprints. Solar energy is trapped using solar panels which are made using chemicals that will leach into the environment once they are discarded (15-20 year life span) - these things are crating more problems than they are solving. The US military is the single biggest polluter in the world (What did Obama do to curb that?). Switching to CFLs and LEDs won't exactly save he world.

Minimum Wage increase was laughable - We need universal income not a $1.50 increase that did absolutely nothing, especially with inflation running high during the stock market recovery. Here's how the Federal minimum wage compares in real terms, see how quickly he buying power collapsed under Obama post bump up?

Obamacare was equally laughable because it allowed the states to basically bypass it completely by not funding it.

29 candidates ran for POTUS out of the DNC. 26 of them were a combination of Governors, Congress, & Mayors. 3 of them business men and women. So 26 of the candidates were people who were voted into positions of power. Which leads back to the 2018 mid terms where an increase voting turn out from certain demographics got someone like AOC into Congress. A bar tender who through political innovation utilized a strong social media campaign to beat out a dude that was re-elected 10 times. Who was in line to to take Pelosi's seat. That wasn't suppose to happen, and shows the crack in the rigged systems armor. Rumors even started that the DNC wanted to make regulations preventing a future AOC from spring boarding the way she did forcing candidates to have to pay their dues. This is where again voting and staying informed preventing such things from happening comes in. But of course if people don't vote or stay informed than these type of laws will pass. Then we will just complain about it after the fact. When the public should be demonstrating that every move made is followed and people in those positions will be held accountable for their decisions. Someone like AOC will be able to run for POTUS in 2024. Not that I am banking on her as some type of savior, but just showing an example. Want to increase the odds of aggressive progressive agenda. Then flood the pool with AOC type of candidates. And someone like AOC can become as powerful as her following just like a Trump.

Your solution requires flooding the pool with AOC type candidates. You think the DNC will just sit around and let them take over? Go back and review 2016. Again. If the people stay informed - sounds great on paper, has never actually happened yet, nor will it. The likes of AOC and Trump get voted in as a backlash of anger (not because people suddenly became well informed). Every incremental gain like the CPFB and the much vaunted Obamacare gets wiped or rendered impotent out the next election cycle as the anger turns on the other side.

newyorknewyork wrote:Meloshouldgo, again if the majority of the US population decided to mobilize and shut down the economy in protest. Enduring the sacrifices of putting food on our families tables in order to achieve those goals, then cool! But the problem is. (unless i'm misunderstanding you) Your basically saying do nothing until such a movement arrives, and only participate when the system is tore down and recreated.

You know how many people feel the same way you do, and don't vote at any level as well. Which means these views aren't being represented to match these feelings. Lower voter turn out from people who feel the system is rigged has not derailed corporate interest coming first. Most likely enhances it. Since not voting isn't a type of protest that actually effects the profits they love so much. As well as doesn't potentially put someone in place that will hopefully combat them.

I fall under the same beliefs that mankind should all be working towards progressing mankind. Creating a higher quality of life for all mankind as the base, with everyone having the common goal of progressing mankind. I also believe that there is no system that will work, or not become corrupt. Unless everyone held the same beliefs which will only happen when Heaven is to come on earth with Jesus as our ruler. Which depending on religious beliefs & backgrounds people may not agree or believe. But that would be another topic.

Until then we do what we can.

Thats sweet. Unfortunately its not based on reality. Yale and Northwestern did a study. Of decades of policies, votes, what a majority of Americans wanted as policy. They found that voting made little to no difference in the outcome. Whatever entrenched interests wanted, they got. Citizens United and the other decision, I cant quite recall, baked this in. Whatever is to be done would have to be collectively as MSG just said, or it wont work. Which is a big reason why Fox news was created. Divide and conquer.

GustavBahler wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Meloshouldgo, again if the majority of the US population decided to mobilize and shut down the economy in protest. Enduring the sacrifices of putting food on our families tables in order to achieve those goals, then cool! But the problem is. (unless i'm misunderstanding you) Your basically saying do nothing until such a movement arrives, and only participate when the system is tore down and recreated.

You know how many people feel the same way you do, and don't vote at any level as well. Which means these views aren't being represented to match these feelings. Lower voter turn out from people who feel the system is rigged has not derailed corporate interest coming first. Most likely enhances it. Since not voting isn't a type of protest that actually effects the profits they love so much. As well as doesn't potentially put someone in place that will hopefully combat them.

I fall under the same beliefs that mankind should all be working towards progressing mankind. Creating a higher quality of life for all mankind as the base, with everyone having the common goal of progressing mankind. I also believe that there is no system that will work, or not become corrupt. Unless everyone held the same beliefs which will only happen when Heaven is to come on earth with Jesus as our ruler. Which depending on religious beliefs & backgrounds people may not agree or believe. But that would be another topic.

Until then we do what we can.

Thats sweet. Unfortunately its not based on reality. Yale and Northwestern did a study. Of decades of policies, votes, what a majority of Americans wanted as policy. They found that voting made little to no difference in the outcome. Whatever entrenched interests wanted, they got. Citizens United and the other decision, I cant quite recall, baked this in. Whatever is to be done would have to be collectively as MSG just said, or it wont work. Which is a big reason why Fox news was created. Divide and conquer.

Preach

meloshouldgo wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Meloshouldgo, again if the majority of the US population decided to mobilize and shut down the economy in protest. Enduring the sacrifices of putting food on our families tables in order to achieve those goals, then cool! But the problem is. (unless i'm misunderstanding you) Your basically saying do nothing until such a movement arrives, and only participate when the system is tore down and recreated.

You know how many people feel the same way you do, and don't vote at any level as well. Which means these views aren't being represented to match these feelings. Lower voter turn out from people who feel the system is rigged has not derailed corporate interest coming first. Most likely enhances it. Since not voting isn't a type of protest that actually effects the profits they love so much. As well as doesn't potentially put someone in place that will hopefully combat them.

I fall under the same beliefs that mankind should all be working towards progressing mankind. Creating a higher quality of life for all mankind as the base, with everyone having the common goal of progressing mankind. I also believe that there is no system that will work, or not become corrupt. Unless everyone held the same beliefs which will only happen when Heaven is to come on earth with Jesus as our ruler. Which depending on religious beliefs & backgrounds people may not agree or believe. But that would be another topic.

Until then we do what we can.

No sir, I am not saying do nothing at all. I am saying organize civil disobedience efforts outside of the political system and continue doing that till it becomes a movement. Yes it will take popular or charismatic people to lead that but there are plenty of those. There is no "in the meantime" any more - from a global warming aspect we are already past the point of no return. Need disruptive action now. This is why we need more and more people to help create awareness and you need a symbolic rallying point like Greta Thunberg. March on DC in large numbers. The Me Too movement did it. Demonstrate outside congress. Clog up wall street - spam their phone systems, hijack their network connectivity, boycott large banks in masses, bring the fight to the system. Basically wake the **** up and demand change at all levels right now. And disrupt BAU in any way possible. All of these can be started by a relatively small group of people. And no it doesn't guarantee a favorable outcome but we literally have nothing to lose.

The only thing I am saying don't do - is passively wait for the next election cycle to cast your useless vote.

That's not what i'm saying either. Again I'm not saying voting alone will get things done. I'm saying vote and then as the majority hold people in positions of power accountable. Even if the system was tore down and rebuilt. Those principals would still need to be applied.

martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:I know you do not like to talk with me or with any person for that matter who experienced the best shot at Socialism and witnessed first hand how it miserably failed in reality.
Especially as you and absolute majority of US leftists never experienced any of this.
Socialism inevitably leads to totalitarian society, destruction of basic human rights, militarism, imperialism, aggression, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
And so leaving society destroyed and progress reversed by decades and centuries.
This happens again and again in many countries and still people never learn.
How many millions of people need to be reduced to bricks in wall of state and killed to make this clear?
It always started by intellectuals with great intention but then when it became clear that this can work only by bending the human nature the "practical" people take over.
And this intellectuals are first to be extinct by them.

Is that one form of bad socialism and can it be auto associated with every other country out there?

Lenin-Stalin-Breznev-Putun Russia, Nazi and Communist Germany, China, Cuba, North Korea, Khmer Rouge Kampuchea, Rwanda, Venezuela, and list goes on... So where is "good socialism" existed?
Where else so many millions of people were killed, jailed, tortured, and died from forced hunger and forced labor?
And were are those "good socialism" counties? Probably in Another Galaxy far far away...

meloshouldgo wrote:I guess Chris Hedges said what I am saying, but he did it two years ago.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/05/21/coming-collapse?

I witnessed the time of society collapse in the country which does not exist anymore.
Soviet Union fall apart and 15 new countries was born to sail on their own.
Some did well and some not.
The people of the majority nations gained, the minorities lost.
Many emigrated and left all behind to start new life.

The great power fall because it was useless to its people. Majority of them.
And as Country which was build and run for its own glory and not for the best of the people it fall apart instantly.

There is a big difference here in America.
Most of the Americans do not need The State. The State need them.
America is build not for the glory of The State but for he benefit of the people who have desire to build their life by hard work using their hands and their brains.
And this people want to stay away for any government connection as much as possible.
The State is needed only to maintain the law, protect from enemies, and care for those who cannot make it on their own.
There are a lot of problems and flaws in the machinery of US society.
Nobody is perfect and no society is. And will never be.
But the generations of Americans build one of the greatest civilizations ever existed on Earth in every aspect of life.
So recognizing all flaws and problems we all should be still grateful for what we have.

And of course if living in US became unbearable there is always a way to find a more desirable place like I did leaving my country of birth.
Nothing is wrong about it. And some people do. It is hard to be your own man so not all people like it.
So they may find some social state which will take care of them... but good luck finding it.

meloshouldgo wrote:

arkrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

arkrud wrote:

arkrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Nalod wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Nalod wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:Name one country in the world in the last couple of hundred years that mirrors what you are looking for so we can study it and see how it operates and how it came to be.

The thing that came closest is the form of capitalism originally advocated by John Maynard Keynes. Keynes understood that for capitalism to work you would required solid social safety nets - universal income, education and healthcare. This was only partially implemented giving birth to social security and medicare and rather badly botched at the source. Again because it had to be constructed via compromise with those who would fight it at every step. In US history it's know as the "new deal" which literally saved capitalism from it's demise and ushered in what is known as the golden age of capitalism early 60s thru mid 70s. Even the badly executed version was able to engender the creation of a solid and vibrant middle class. All western democracies adopted this but then most of them got corrupted by the advent of militarized plunder known as neoliberalism. That was championed by Milton Friedman and the Chicago school of Economics. Only a few countries still have remnants of the new deal system - like Sweden.

Understand, that I am not asking for another new deal, I could see myself supporting the real thing proposed by Keynes. And no I have no love for capitalism, but the data shows it can work and it did for a period of time, right here in the US.

I admire your enthusiasm. Perhaps when I was younger I would have thought similar. I studied economics and ideals that are unfortunately not implemented for a host of reasons. I could drone on and on about why these ideals don’t as they do in the small Nordic region of Northern Europe. In fact, I prefer you keep pushing it forward. One day this system might burst at the scenes and we’ll need you to promote.
We are a fearful nation which I fear leads us to tilt more to a nationalist right movement and the ugly underbelly that comes with it.

This isn't enthusiasm, it's my philosophy. I am not a supporter of any type of capitalism but I think this is the form of governance/economic system most likely to work here.
I do think Neoliberal dogma is pervasive in our schools/colleges and that is what they teach us - Certain ideals are not possible in the US, Capitalism is a free market system, the actors are always acting in rational self interest, the market always auto-corrects inefficiencies blah blah blah. About 85% of our population has been farm raised on this propaganda- kind of he point of the animation I posted above. Your droning on would be welcome conversation - please do so, by all means.

How old are you? not being snarky, it matters.
"I admire your enthusiasm for your Philosphy"..........Is that better?

I am a year from being 50, how about you? I am a lot more enthusiastic about my actual political positions, this falls into the half-hearted support categories. I think it will work, but it's still capitalism.

Looks like we are in the same age segment.
I know you do not like to talk with me or with any person for that matter who experienced the best shot at Socialism and witnessed first hand how it miserably failed in reality.
Especially as you and absolute majority of US leftists never experienced any of this.
Socialism inevitably leads to totalitarian society, destruction of basic human rights, militarism, imperialism, aggression, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
And so leaving society destroyed and progress reversed by decades and centuries.
This happens again and again in many countries and still people never learn.
How many millions of people need to be reduced to bricks in the wall of state and killed to make this clear?
It always started by intellectuals with great intention but then when it became clear that this can work only by bending the human nature the "practical" people take over.
And this intellectuals are first to be extinct by them.

You know- just about everything you said above is completely wrong.

I know you do not like to talk with me or with any person for that matter who experienced the best shot at Socialism and witnessed first hand how it miserably failed in reality.

FALSE: There are other people on this board who lived in Russia and migrated here(like Ramtour), and I don't have any issues talking to them or talking to you. I do however sometimes struggle to understand what you are saying and I don't carry out discussions with you because you only offer vague generalizations with no supporting examples, or data. You often contradict yourself and frankly it's hard to parse out what you are saying. I am not trying to be rude, just honest.

Especially as you and absolute majority of US leftists never experienced any of this.

FALSE: Back up and read, I grew up in a communist run state and I have experienced it just fine.

Socialism inevitably leads to totalitarian society, destruction of basic human rights, militarism, imperialism, aggression, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.

FALSE: This is simple brainwashed propaganda with no supporting evidence. There is more militarism, imperialism, aggression and ethnic cleansing being carried out by the United States of America than any other country in the world along with gross violations of human rights.

And so leaving society destroyed and progress reversed by decades and centuries. This happens again and again in many countries and still people never learn.

CATEGORICALLY FALSE: In fact here's a list of countries destroyed by some combination of militarism, aggression, regime change, crippling economic sanctions and plunder carried out by the US and it's Western capitalist allies

Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Palestinian settlements, Cuba, Iceland, Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Chile, Colombia ... I maybe missing a few

Here's a modern history of a country utterly destroyed by Arkrud style capitalism. The most clear and strident example of how a country with good living standards where a lot of large institutions were state owned and operated, went through Neoliberal style massive privatization, followed by massive paper wealth creation followed by utter collapse. Iceland is unique because it happened almost without foreign intervention (military or economic). But the privatization movement in Iceland was directly influenced by the Chicago School of Economics and Neloib dogma grown right here in the US. They then went back to a variant of Keynsian capitalism and are prospering again.

https://monthlyreview.org/2013/10/01/lessons-iceland/

1. The argument that you cannot understand me is laughable. Everybody can. Another story you do not want to. But its on you.

What's laughable is that you think my inability to comprehend you babbling, is an argument.

2. India never was a Communist state. It has people in power who claimed to be this but the society was always developing capitalism.

And your inability to comprehend just about anything is astonishing. Nowhere did I say India is a communist state. I said I grew up in a state inside the country of India, the state had been run by communists since 25 years before my birth and continued to be run by them all the way into the 90s. Country as in USA and State as in Michigan, get it?

3. Communist Propaganda seriously affected you. I was listening to same gibberish on Soviet Union TV for good 20 years.

I don't think so, because I am not proposing communism for America, you are defending neoliberalism. It's pretty easy to see who is a victim of propaganda here

4. Stating that some other countries are acting badly does not vindicate totalitarian communist states for all genocide they commuted to other countries and to their own people.

That is the problem isn't it? You are trying to make me defend communism in a discussion about the destructive nature of American capitalism. And then you accuse me of changing the subject? Do you see how desperate you sound?

5. I am not sure what is Arkrud style capitalism..???
But if you insist - this is a country build as Republic with separation of powers and elections of all officials, with Free Speech, Market economy, human rights and human values being above the State interests, and social guaranties for everyone.
The Scandinavian capitalist countries are leading the way but US and EU making good strides too.

I have not insisted, but you are wrong. Iceland was taken through a period of free market capitalism that you worship which completely destroyed their economy. Yes, today they have been able to revert back to a social democracy - good for them. If they had US style capitalism, they would be bankrupt and destitute by now.

6. Switching the subject from the point of communist states failed miserably to my persona and ills of capitalist countries does not change the facts.
Your demagogy is at its best.

I am not switching subjects you idiot, that IS the subject of this thread and communism is not. If you don't like stop posting in it.

7. I am just stating my point because it is stupid to change somebody's fate with facts. So keep believing.
I on my part will do the best I can to help people to not fall for this heresy.

Lets put aside all personal stuff which is irrelevant.
And get to the core of the discussion.
This is what I am supporting:
Republic with separation of powers and elections of all officials, with Free Speech, Market economy, human rights and human values being above the State interests, and social guaranties for everyone
The details on how Market economy is regulated and how The State is run are important but they are changing over time as human civilization evolves.
So are we really at odds on core values or really not?
I would guess you are not a supporter of:
Totalitarian state with singe oligarchy group ruling by means of one party system, fake elections if any, propaganda and destruction of free speech, violations of all human rights, valuing State (Empire) over people, and social guaranties only for oligarchy and their direct servants and guards
Please clarify...
And calling Michigan of a time a communist state is kind of laughable.
If you define the communism as economical system where all economic activity is done by government planning and all property belongs to State, Michigan was not any of that.
If you define the communism as political doctrine of single ideology and equality of all people, Michigan was not even close.
I guess we are arguing about a term which meaning understood by us completely differenty.
As far as neo-liberalism term itself it exist for small group of academia eggheads and has no meaning for absolute majority of population.