nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Were all socialists spoilt as children?

realitykeeper

Children who grow up thinking the world owes them a living tend to be spoit.

Socialists also tend to think this way, hence the question, were socialists spoilt as children? I am not saying they were necessarily because I think an adult who displays behaviour similar to a spoilt brat were I suspect raised by permissive parents. This is a particular parenting style were kids basically do what they want without boundaries and often they get what they want if the parent is also over indulgent.

I see this spoilt type of adult everyday in my line of work. Sometimes they drink alcohol when they really shouldn`t and they fail to take instruction even when they are sober (which they are most of the time).

What should we as a nation do to stamp out spoilt behaviour? Do all new parents need to be thought the authoritative parenting method? Do we need bigger prisons and forced labor camps for those who are already grown up but are spoilt and in need of reforming? Spoilt people gravitate to a life of crime so discipline must be rigorous and immediate in my opinion.

This system of waiting until they have a lot of offenses committed before they are incarcerated, simply won`t do.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

BalcombeSt4

amadangomor wrote: »

Ireland is different though. Here we have upper middle class lads getting elected as far left wing socialists but don't do Jack **** for the working man and instead look for more hand outs for the non working man.

Which "far left wing socialists" in Ireland would these be?

amadangomor

Cordell wrote: »

klaz, you experienced failed socialism and its aftermath in those countries. You never experienced communism because it never existed anywhere, as it needs as a prerequisite a successful socialist state

Human nature and our intelligence will always mean that we will have some sort of trading mechanism, as such there will always be people who have more resources than others and some that will look to accumulate them. As night follows day the corruption and inequality will follow this.

You are asking people to go against their very nature to create conditions that could spawn a communist ideal, will never happen.

amadangomor

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Which "far left wing socialists" in Ireland would these be?

Paul "given far too much airtime fake socialist" Murphy for one.

kowloon

Pay attention to who is telling you what socialism is, then read a bit on where socialism came from. It's best to ignore American politics when it comes to political terms as the meaning of language there has been warped.

amadangomor

kowloon wrote: »

Pay attention to who is telling you what socialism is, then read a bit on where socialism came from. It's best to ignore American politics when it comes to political terms as the meaning of language there has been warped.

There are no real socialist politicians in Ireland. The likes of Paul Murphy are total fakes. Populist student union wannabee communists who come from a well to do background. Who jump on any perceived crisis in the country to gain an electorate for themselves so they can spout about more perceived injustices and earn a tidy living while doing so.

A real socialist would get out here and fight for people who get up and work hard to keep the country going. Don't get me started on the unions

BalcombeSt4

amadangomor wrote: »

Paul "given far too much airtime fake socialist" Murphy for one.

And what policies has Paul Murphy or anyone from AAA-PBP introduced that became government legislation?
The most famous thing I remember Paul Murphy for was blocking Joan Burton's car.

But this is the point, Ireland has never had a left-wing government or even a center governemnt in power. The two main political parties in Ireland are two of the most notoriously conservative parties in Europe.

To say a party who's most infamous action was to encourage citizens not to pay a water bill, can be called "far-left", shows how much the Overton window has shifted to the right.

amadangomor

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

And what policies has Paul Murphy or anyone from AAA-PBP introduced that became government legislation?
The most famous thing I remember Paul Murphy for was blocking Joan Burton's car.

But this is the point, Ireland has never had a left-wing government or even a center governemnt in power. The two main political parties in Ireland are two of the most notoriously conservative parties in Europe.

To say a party who's most infamous action was to encourage citizens not to pay a water bill, can be called "far-left", shows how much the Overton window has shifted to the right.

The whole concept of water charges is championed by every genuine left wing party in Europe so makes no sense that our so called lefties are so against it. Done right it could discourage waste and money would be ring fenced for infrastructure.

What happened was that they saw the populist bandwagon to jump on to beat up the government.

In any case we are tied to the globalised multinational economy for good or ill and anything left of left of centre is not compatible with the way our economy is set up. My job depends on this and it puts a roof over my children's heads and I'm not under threat of having to emigrate like many before me so I'm not complaining .

[Deleted User]

amadangomor wrote: »

A real socialist would get out here and fight for people who get up and work hard to keep the country going. Don't get me started on the unions

There are hundreds of interpretations of what socialism or Communism is. Just as there's different interpretations of any political system. "A real socialist" is just your own interpretation, no less or more valid, than someone else's. All systems evolve over time or fade into nothing.

Socialism, in one form or another, is present in many nations, and is promoted by many people. In most cases, their actions and speeches show a massive variety of opinions on what it means. The same can be said for democracy. US democracy is very different in practice and interpretation than what is generally considered in Europe. Just as European socialism is far different from the type of socialism performed in Asia.

[Deleted User]

Huh? Whats the problem?

Is this just the case that you don't want to discuss the topic, and don't want anyone else to do so either?

Edit. I scanned the previous pages... Am I correct in thinking this is your first and only post to the thread... Your only contribution is to shut down other peoples discussions...

realitykeeper

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Well seeing as how most of them grew up in piss poor slums & ghettos in Africa, Latin America, South Asia & Russia I highly doubt it.

Ah but you forget, this is the 21st century and not the 20th. Russia has not been Communist for a long time now, neither has China (in anything but name) and a lot of African countries have coped on and dumped Communism in the cesspit of history where it belongs. But those countries used to be very poor because of Communism, that is certainly true.

As for Venezuela, that only became Communist since Chavez (and now the bus driver Maduro). Most of the electorate grew up in more affluent times so perhaps a lot of their poorer families spoilt their kids when times were better.

Even here in Ireland, I think kids in single parent families or families that are long term welfare dependent, tend to get spoilt. Again, permissive and indulgent parenting tends to make them spoilt and the kids then tend to grow up expecting everything to be handed to them and when it isn`t, some of them sometimes tend to steal.

realitykeeper

amadangomor wrote: »

Ireland is different though. Here we have upper middle class lads getting elected as far left wing socialists but don't do Jack **** for the working man and instead look for more hand outs for the non working man.

You sound like someone who votes for left wing candidates in the hope they might do something for the working man. Even if they did, it is not a good idea to vote for the left. Any benefits they bestow cannot be sustained because socialism does not work, it only makes things worse.

Elmer Blooker

Where are all these socialists? Are there any still around?
I know a lot of people who were socialist but now are nothing more than lukewarm liberals who believe absolutely everything that the Irish Times and Guardian tells them.
Who cares anymore about the distribution of wealth when there are much more important issues such as gender neutral toilets and farting cows!

Ireland is different though. Here we have upper middle class lads getting elected as far left wing socialists but don't do Jack **** for the working man and instead look for more hand outs for the non working man.

These upper middle class lads as you describe them only capitalised on the water charges protests and the recession but are now in decline as FF make a comeback. They are insignificant now.

Cordell

amadangomor wrote: »

Human nature and our intelligence will always mean that we will have some sort of trading mechanism, as such there will always be people who have more resources than others and some that will look to accumulate them. As night follows day the corruption and inequality will follow this.

You are asking people to go against their very nature to create conditions that could spawn a communist ideal, will never happen.

And yet, the communist manifesto being almost 200 years old, some people still don't want to understand these simple points.

BalcombeSt4

realitykeeper wrote: »

Ah but you forget, this is the 21st century and not the 20th. Russia has not been Communist for a long time now, neither has China (in anything but name) and a lot of African countries have coped on and dumped Communism in the cesspit of history where it belongs. But those countries used to be very poor because of Communism, that is certainly true.

As for Venezuela, that only became Communist since Chavez (and now the bus driver Maduro). Most of the electorate grew up in more affluent times so perhaps a lot of their poorer families spoilt their kids when times were better.

Even here in Ireland, I think kids in single parent families or families that are long term welfare dependent, tend to get spoilt. Again, permissive and indulgent parenting tends to make them spoilt and the kids then tend to grow up expecting everything to be handed to them and when it isn`t, some of them sometimes tend to steal.

Russia never claimed to be a Communist country, a Communist society is stateless, meaning there is no centralized government or power, from 1917 - 1991 they did have a centralized government, it might have claimed it was trying to reach the goal of Communism (I doubt they genuinley were tho) through the ideology of Marxism-Leninism but they never claimed to be a full stateless, classless Communist country. The same is true about the African & Asian countries, they all adopted either a Marxist-Leninist model or Marxist-Leninist-Maoist model. Both Russia and China had some of the poorest peasent societies in the world before they became Marxist-Leninist states, within 30 years of the 1917 Revolution Russia went from being a backwards peasent society to being the second most powerful country on the planet, and China is now one of the most powerful countries on the planet, I'm not claiming they became powerful soley because of Communism, they didn't but to say they are poor because of Communism is clearly not true either, they were a lot poorer before their respective Marxist-Leninist revolutions.

Venezuela still has a large part of it's economy market based, most of it's industry is privatized not nationalized, the working class do not control the means of production & large part of it's press is highly critical of the government, if it was a Marxist-Leninist controlled country no parts of the press would be critical of government policy.

The bit about Ireland has nothing to do with what were are talking about. Government hand outs do not equal Socialism, as a lot of people seem to be confused about. The core principal of Socialism is the working class democratically produce & control the means of production, "do people get too much free stuff" is a different argument.

BalcombeSt4

realitykeeper wrote: »

You sound like someone who votes for left wing candidates in the hope they might do something for the working man. Even if they did, it is not a good idea to vote for the left. Any benefits they bestow cannot be sustained because socialism does not work, it only makes things worse.

So we shouldn't vote for the left, I assume you are not happy with conservative FF or FG, you seem to be a fan of strong men & of authoritarian ideas, so do you suggest we should become a Fascist state?

BalcombeSt4

the beer revolu wrote: »

How come most Christians have right wing, conservative tendencies, while jesus, as he is portrayed, was very much anti establishment and, arguably, socialist?

Because he wanted to get free silver of the Romans so he could buy himself & that prostitute Mary Magdaline new sandles & sit around on their arses in the public baths all day & then watch gladiators.

Thank God we had strong men like Pilot & Judas to set this lazy Socialist straight.

Tammy!

Haven't read the thread tbf but have always found people from more privileged backgrounds to be more conservative and pro capitalist even it they didn't acknowledge it or recognize their beliefs to be so.

kowloon

Tammy! wrote: »

Haven't read the thread tbf but have always found people from more privileged backgrounds to be more conservative and pro capitalist even it they didn't acknowledge it or recognize their beliefs to be so.

I've seen in more than one source that people tend to get more conservative as they get more wealthy. It's easy to understand as people are greedy by nature and will try and keep the system as it is if it benefits them.
The outlier in this is all the extremely wealthy people who are very socialist and pro redistribution of wealth. Perhaps some people are happy to seemingly act against their own interests as they value charity more than further personal enrichment.

Raconteuse

In my experience, people from privileged backgrounds tend to be liberal.

[Deleted User]

realitykeeper wrote: »

Ah but you forget, this is the 21st century and not the 20th. Russia has not been Communist for a long time now, neither has China (in anything but name) and a lot of African countries have coped on and dumped Communism in the cesspit of history where it belongs. But those countries used to be very poor because of Communism, that is certainly true.
.

I find it hilarious that the people who did not become communist get to classify what it means to be communist, and can decide that the actual communists were not communist. :pac::pac::pac: Hilarious.

Communism in it's purest form cannot exist alone... but that's the same for all political systems. Democracy in Europe is heavily laced with elements of socialism. Just as China is a heavily communist-socialist-capitalist nation. It's just that it emphasizes different characteristics

BalcombeSt4

amadangomor wrote: »

The whole concept of water charges is championed by every genuine left wing party in Europe so makes no sense that our so called lefties are so against it. Done right it could discourage waste and money would be ring fenced for infrastructure.

What happened was that they saw the populist bandwagon to jump on to beat up the government.

In any case we are tied to the globalised multinational economy for good or ill and anything left of left of centre is not compatible with the way our economy is set up. My job depends on this and it puts a roof over my children's heads and I'm not under threat of having to emigrate like many before me so I'm not complaining .

Then change the way the economy is set up so no children in Ireland have to go without roofs over their heads or without food in their stomachs.
A political system should help the needs of the people, the people shouldn't be fit around the needs of a failing political system.

The biggest problem in Ireland & most developed countries is subtance abuse, one for obvious health reasons, but I also I believe because governments what large sections of their populations they govern to be addicted to drink & drugs because a drunk or drug addicted wont challenge failed political systems or challenge the politicians who do nothing & give themselves obscene bonuses.

Yamanoto

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

The two main political parties in Ireland are two of the most notoriously conservative parties in Europe.

As Paul Calf would so succinctly put it, bag of sh1te.

realitykeeper

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

So we shouldn't vote for the left, I assume you are not happy with conservative FF or FG, you seem to be a fan of strong men & of authoritarian ideas, so do you suggest we should become a Fascist state?

FF and FG are far left as far as I am concerned. As for strong men and authoritarianism, that can work very well but it usually doesn`t because he is usually a clueless tyrant. A strong leader can be very good if he stamps out tyranny and imposes order and truly progressive ideas (which are different to what liberals think is progressive).

Such leaders are rare but they are more likely to emerge where there is an enlightened population.

realitykeeper

Deleted User wrote: »

I find it hilarious that the people who did not become communist get to classify what it means to be communist, and can decide that the actual communists were not communist. :pac::pac::pac: Hilarious.

Communism in it's purest form cannot exist alone... but that's the same for all political systems. Democracy in Europe is heavily laced with elements of socialism. Just as China is a heavily communist-socialist-capitalist nation. It's just that it emphasizes different characteristics

Yes BalcombeSt4 said Russia never claimed to be Communist a few posts back, but of course they were so that is funny like you say.

Communism, as in Russia for most of the 20th century was able to survive as long as it did without capitalism to prop it up but that survival came at tremendous cost. Tens of millions died working as slaves in horrendous conditions in the gulags and work camps for example and the luckiest ones who "benefited" lived very dreary lives in Moscow. Millions lived in terrible flats with communal facilities (as befitting an intrusive Communist regime) i.e. shared bathrooms and kitchens, some apartments were designed in a way that minimized privacy. For example, you would have to walk through each room to get to the last room in the flat.

I think capitalism could exist quite happily without having to prop up socialism. Socialism without capitalism can also exist but apart from the misery of it, they don`t let you escape to a capitalist country and if you try you get sent to a gulag.

nkl12xtw5goz70

realitykeeper wrote: »

Communism, as in Russia for most of the 20th century was able to survive as long as it did without capitalism to prop it up but that survival came at tremendous cost.

The USSR had a massive shadow market economy that some researchers believe may have accounted for between a quarter and a half of the total economy during the communist era. In fact, the shadow economy in Russia today still accounts for an estimated 20 percent of GDP.

In other words, the USSR never had "pure" communism. It had a planned economy bolstered by all manner of shadow market activity.

Mad_maxx

Emery Victorious Bolt wrote: »

The USSR had a massive shadow market economy that some researchers believe may have accounted for between a quarter and a half of the total economy during the communist era. In fact, the shadow economy in Russia today still accounts for an estimated 20 percent of GDP.

In other words, the USSR never had "pure" communism. It had a planned economy bolstered by all manner of shadow market activity.

Do you think China can sustain it's present growth trojectory?

Will trump succeed in his trade war?

Personally I think America is much stronger than China than is often portrayed, i think China is limited by its necessary internal repression but also by its tiny cultural footprint relative to the USA

Peatys

the beer revolu wrote: »

How come most Christians have right wing, conservative tendencies, while jesus, as he is portrayed, was very much anti establishment and, arguably, socialist?

first you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the altar boys.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Do you think China can sustain it's present growth trojectory?

Well, China's growth rate has been slowing for the past decade as its economy matures. Its future growth depends on a number of factors, including whether it can complete the transition to a free-market economy and become less dependent on fixed investment and exports.

The long-term effects of the Trump trade war are uncertain—but there are no real winners in a trade war. The outcome will depend on what happens in US politics in 2020 and beyond, as well as whether diplomacy or new trade agreements can address some of the underlying issues.

[Deleted User]

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Do you think China can sustain it's present growth trojectory?

Yes, and no.

Yes, because there is still a lot of room for growth within Asia. China still hasn't tapped into the majority of its natural resources, having imported most of their needs from other countries. So they're sitting on a crap-ton of resources which can used to fuel their economy, along with a massive population. People are a resource and the Chinese are quite good at exploiting that resource. The problem with their economy is that it's growth has always been artificial with the government fueling the boom, but nobody truly knows what their cash reserves are like. I've seen estimates but nobody knows for certain. The real problem is that their economy has never faced any crashes and so their resilience is in question.

And no, because of their political situation. Xi is supreme leader, but he's answerable to the military. They've been modernising and that tends to encourage the military to want to test their strategies and technologies. A war for China (even on a small scale) would be disastrous for them, both for internal happiness, but also their reputation across Asia especially with their trading partners. You've got to step away from the Western media to understand, but China has built up a rather good reputation over the last few decades in the region with many Asian countries. It's reported differently in western media because most westerners can't understand the way culture and reputation works here expecting it to be the same in the West. But it's not.

Xi promised the military the return of Taiwan when he took power. That's a major obstacle to China's growth.

Will trump succeed in his trade war?

Probably. I suspect he'll succeed in ways that are unseen and less obvious... Which will be taken as a failure by his enemies in the States.

Personally I think America is much stronger than China than is often portrayed, i think China is limited by its necessary internal repression but also by its tiny cultural footprint relative to the USA

The US has their own style of Internal repression, and it's been growing in influence since Vietnam. It's just that our perception of the US is different and that tends to blindsight people to just how much the power dynamics have changed.

America is stronger than China in terms of military power, but it hasn't the capacity to project it's power that it once had. In a conventional war, they'll be too slow to respond to Chinese aggression in terms of men on the ground. Saying that, the US has China surrounded with military camps, missile bases, and airports. It's one of the reasons that China needs Taiwan so badly. TBH, it's a lot like the Cuban missile crisis, except that China is the one surrounded by American missiles. If America had experienced the same, we'd be seeing war already... but that's different, isn't it? :rolleyes:

The problem for the US is that China has been preparing for war with them for forty years. They've developed missiles to take out the US surface fleets, and more missiles to take out the US Satellites. So, any war would be extremely costly for both sides... and it's worth remembering that both countries are nuclear with strike capabilities. It doesn't matter that America has more missiles, China could still wipe out the US with their own present stockpile.

I seriously hope that nothing comes of it. It would end the world as we know it because both countries wouldn't hesitate much in launching nukes should they feel justified.

Raconteuse

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

The two main political parties in Ireland are two of the most notoriously conservative parties in Europe.

Yeah, what with the whole same sex marriage and abortion and gay taoiseach...

I don't think they're left-wing but it's not a case of just left or right. To say they're "notoriously" conservative (I doubt they're known outside of Ireland) is absolutely absurd.