Goddam socialists and their spoiled rich kids

[Elixir]

I think the actual problem is that you're refusing to accept the joke for what it is. I am not saying you should think it is funny or on point, but rather simply accept what is actually being said.

No one said you were on the right in this thread, but the thread title does seem to be a tongue-in-cheek poke at the subset of people (alt-right, I guess) who throw 'socialism' around as a bogeyman against any policy or economic system they don't want to give consideration.

With significant state ownership and welfare programs, Norway represents a country which gets written off as 'socialist' in this manner.

For the record, I don't believe the OP was earnestly saying all of the young people in Norway are actually 'spoiled rich kids' either.

The right redefined Socialism to mean any program promoted by democrats. And I mean any program. It's a very effective method to move fence sitters to the right. It's beyond my comprehension to understand why some on the left allow the right to continue promoting this garbage.

GOP is the Party of Fear. And that's some mighty fertile ground they've staked out. It is a thousand times easier to induce fear with a simple message, than to create enthusiasm for the hard work that it actually takes to solve problems.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I think the actual problem is that you're refusing to accept the joke for what it is. I am not saying you should think it is funny or on point, but rather simply accept what is actually being said.

No one said you were on the right in this thread, but the thread title does seem to be a tongue-in-cheek poke at the subset of people (alt-right, I guess) who throw 'socialism' around as a bogeyman against any policy or economic system they don't want to give consideration.

With significant state ownership and welfare programs, Norway represents a country which gets written off as 'socialist' in this manner.

For the record, I don't believe the OP was earnestly saying all of the young people in Norway are actually 'spoiled rich kids' either.

The right redefined Socialism to mean any program promoted by democrats. And I mean any program. It's a very effective method to move fence sitters to the right. It's beyond my comprehension to understand why some on the left allow the right to continue promoting this garbage.

GOP is the Party of Fear. And that's some mighty fertile ground they've staked out. It is a thousand times easier to induce fear with a simple message, than to create enthusiasm for the hard work that it actually takes to solve problems.

Buddy: I can't agree with you in the least. The GOP is attempting to protect us from the Jihadist Hordes, unaccompanied Mexican children, socialist meanies, the maundering gay converters, gun grabbers, and Rosie O'Donnell! Bless those cultural warriors!

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Is English not your first language? Or are you simply deaf to the hypocrisy of the alt-right scaremongerers?

I see the problem. Because I am a staunch advocate of the free market, you managed to convince yourself that I am somehow on the right. It's not true, and adds to your other abuses of the English language. Nice use of "I know you are but what am I".

I think the actual problem is that you're refusing to accept the joke for what it is. I am not saying you should think it is funny or on point, but rather simply accept what is actually being said.

Ah, but jokes need to be funny for the joke to work.

Also, it is better when jokes have a factual basis. Issac Asimov once had a character say "the best lies are the closest to the truth, and the truth when it will serve will make the best lie of all." The same is true of jokes. The best jokes are closest to the truth, and the truth when it will serve makes the best joke of all. That's where Elixir's "joke" fails.

With significant state ownership and welfare programs, Norway represents a country which gets written off as 'socialist' in this manner.

But they don't have significant state ownership, and welfare programs aren't part of the definition of socialism.

It's a sad day when you have to spell it out ... but thanks - I guess.

Translating your posts into English would help.

See, that joke works because it is quite close to truth, unlike what Elixir attempted.

 

[Half-Life]

Scary stuff. Nazi's were National Socialists. Bernie Sanders said in one of the debates he was going to try to nationalize almost everything and he calls himself a socialist.

He'll never say "I'm a National Socialist" because he'd be seen as a Nazi. He's pulling the wool over the eyes of the younger generation. Bernie is a big fan of the Soviet Union. Don't vote for comrade Sanders.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

Ah, but jokes need to be funny for the joke to work.

Not always. Anyway, I was mildly amused by it. I get whom it was mocking and how.

But they don't have significant state ownership,

I'm not sure where you come up with that. I suppose 'significant' is subjective.

and welfare programs aren't part of the definition of socialism.

Irrelevant. The joke is not predicated on the actual definition of socialism.

See, that joke works because it is quite close to truth, unlike what Elixir attempted.

You may be the only one who didn't get it. Again, not saying you should find it funny or on point. Just stop arguing against something no one is saying. This thread and the facetious title don't hinge on Norway actually being socialist.

This is my last comment on this subject. I've hit my threshold of entertaining people who want to argue beside the point being made. Last word on the matter is yours for the taking.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So a whole thread that has Norway being socialist as a premise doesn't rely on Norway actually being socialist.

 

[Arctish]

So a whole thread that has Norway being called socialist as a premise doesn't rely on Norway actually being socialist.

fyp

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So a whole thread that has Norway being socialist as a premise doesn't rely on Norway actually being socialist.

byp

fify

 

[ZiprHead]

Scary stuff. Nazi's were National Socialists. Bernie Sanders said in one of the debates he was going to try to nationalize almost everything and he calls himself a socialist.

He'll never say "I'm a National Socialist" because he'd be seen as a Nazi. He's pulling the wool over the eyes of the younger generation. Bernie is a big fan of the Soviet Union. Don't vote for comrade Sanders.

He did? When was this? I must have missed it because a major contender for the presidency saying that would have been major headlines.

 

[Half-Life]

Scary stuff. Nazi's were National Socialists. Bernie Sanders said in one of the debates he was going to try to nationalize almost everything and he calls himself a socialist.

He'll never say "I'm a National Socialist" because he'd be seen as a Nazi. He's pulling the wool over the eyes of the younger generation. Bernie is a big fan of the Soviet Union. Don't vote for comrade Sanders.

He did? When was this? I must have missed it because a major contender for the presidency saying that would have been major headlines.

He said it as a joke, but we know he's serious. He said something like, "I'm not gonna nationalize everything on my first day in office....maybe my 2nd day...no I'm just kidding" and he got a few laughs.

Definitely not a joke.

 

[ZiprHead]

Scary stuff. Nazi's were National Socialists. Bernie Sanders said in one of the debates he was going to try to nationalize almost everything and he calls himself a socialist.

He'll never say "I'm a National Socialist" because he'd be seen as a Nazi. He's pulling the wool over the eyes of the younger generation. Bernie is a big fan of the Soviet Union. Don't vote for comrade Sanders.

He did? When was this? I must have missed it because a major contender for the presidency saying that would have been major headlines.

He said it as a joke, but we know he's serious. He said something like, "I'm not gonna nationalize everything on my first day in office....maybe my 2nd day...no I'm just kidding" and he got a few laughs.

Definitely not a joke.

He was obviously joking, and it was directed at people like you because you think stupid shit like that.

 

[Arctish]

So a whole thread that has Norway being socialist as a premise doesn't rely on Norway actually being socialist.

byp

fify

You're begging my pardon? You think I should be begging yours?

The joke in the OP is based on the commonplace accusation leveled against Scandinavian countries with strong social welfare platforms by right wingers in the US: that they're Socialist. They don't have to actually be socialist for the joke to be understood by anyone with a general understanding of right wing talking points wrt social welfare programs.

 

[Derec]

Wood and watermills provided needed energy in the 18th century, whale oil and coal did it in the 19th. Oil, natural gas, hydroelectric plants, and nuclear power plants provided the bulk of the needed energy in the 20th. There's no reason for us to stop developing better, cleaner, and more efficient sources of energy in the 21st century, Chicken Little-ism notwithstanding.

It's not chicken-litteism (that fits those with irrational fear of nuclear energy to a t, though). I have nothing against developing better technologies for the 21st century.
But even under best-case scenarios, we will need to burn (baby burn) oil and therefore drill (baby drill) for it for at least two or three more decades. "Keep it in the ground" just gives a competitive advantage to Russia, Saudi Arabia etc. and Norwegians are too smart to fall for it. Unlike our leftists.

 

[Derec]

According to Mark A. Peterson, a professor of public policy, political science, and law at UCLA, Democratic socialism is "a call for the democratically-elected to use the public sector to promote greater equality and opportunity." Those who identify as Democratic socialists believe in giving everyone the chance to find equal economic footing, and see free or low-cost health care, tuition-free public education, and universal child care as means to that end.

"Democratic socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few," the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) website states. The DSA stands for restructuring our government and the U.S. economy "so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives."

I think Peterson is muddying the waters between  democratic socialism and  social democracy here. They are two very distinct ideologies. The former is a form of socialism, i.e. it seems an economic order dominated by public ownership of means of production. Social democracy on the other hand advocates a high level of social services and regulation within a capitalist/market eco framework.

DSA are more honest, and admit they are after "social ownership".

Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.

What they don't want, though, is private ownership of means of production. That makes them socialists proper.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned.

While central planning was a common feature of actually existing socialism in the 20th century, it is not a defining characteristic. Public, or as DSA describe it, "social" ownership of means of production is.

 

[Derec]

Read the thread, Jason. I apologize for using the word "socialists" in the OP title, now that I've seen how it triggers y'all.

Nobody is "triggered". We are merely correcting your incorrect word usage. Learn from it, get over it, and move on.

 

[Derec]

You want them all to understand perfectly the difference between socialism and social democracy?

Bernie Sanders is 78 years old and he still hasn't grasped the difference.

 

[Derec]

The right redefined Socialism to mean any program promoted by democrats. And I mean any program. It's a very effective method to move fence sitters to the right. It's beyond my comprehension to understand why some on the left allow the right to continue promoting this garbage.

So why are people like Elixir aiding them in that miscomprehension?

 

[Angry Floof]

Fear mongering around extreme, inaccurate, and downright stupid interpretations of socialism are being used by right wing manipulators to keep the base frothing with fear and hatred for all the outgroups they've demonized.

But let's pretend it's all Elixir. That's the ticket!

 

[DBT]

I think Peterson is muddying the waters between  democratic socialism and  social democracy here. They are two very distinct ideologies. The former is a form of socialism, i.e. it seems an economic order dominated by public ownership of means of production. Social democracy on the other hand advocates a high level of social services and regulation within a capitalist/market eco framework.

DSA are more honest, and admit they are after "social ownership".


What they don't want, though, is private ownership of means of production. That makes them socialists proper.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned.

While central planning was a common feature of actually existing socialism in the 20th century, it is not a defining characteristic. Public, or as DSA describe it, "social" ownership of means of production is.

Democratic socialists give their definition of democratic socialism. And my point was that 'socialism' doesn't just mean a single rigid ideology. That social welfare programs such as unemployment benefits, universal health care and other safety nets within a largely capitalist nation is a form of socialism, in effect and practice a blend of capitalism and socialism.

 

[Half-Life]

Pulling up the numbers here and it is around 67 million deaths from socialism.

There's a reason there are no studies that recommend socialism over capitalism.