...you should really know what it means.  

I have a series of three essays about socialism and socialists written by a very bright guy with a very dry sense of humor (not me - I wish I'd written them) that very accurately explains when you should call someone a socialist and what, EXACTLY, it means.  It's not just an expletive.  It also explains why socialism does not and will not work here or anywhere.  Good ammunition the next time you get into a discussion about government.

If anybody is interested, I'd be more than happy to e-mail them a copy.  They are FAR too long to post here, and I don't have copyright on the material.  

I have the essays in one Word document that runs about 17 pages.  Well worth the time to read.

[email protected]

[sniper]

the problem is that when we call someone a socialist we know why and they may know why and they actually probably feel proud.  they call us nazis and all that crap and get away with it.  if they called us conservatives or "republican form of democracians"  we would not mind a bit, so when we call them a socialist, we use it in a derrogatory manner, but they dont care, they think we are the morons!  its like dealing with children so why even bother anymore, i'm losing my fight.  long live newt.

socialist=lazy lying, spineless douchebag yearning to make everyone work for them. Can be found desperately defending their illgotten salaries (most prevelant in union shops)

comunism=we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us

republicans are centralists

democrats are socialists, commie or nazi

For those interested, I've gotten four requests (one last night).  I'm at work now (14:00 MST), but when I get home I'll send them out.

Please comment on the essay(s) here once you've read them.  Thanks.

[sniper]

I just emailed a request as well.
Thanks

OK, I sent this out to about eight people.  Anybody get around to reading it?  Any comments?
Just curious.

btt
[sniper]

Just emailed you for a copy- can't wait to forward it to some socialist bastard acquanitances.

I will agree with you, KBaker.
In fact, when people here "communism" they automatically go up in arms and yell bloody murder about red scares and evil ways.

The Communism that Karl Marx formulated is not quite the communism that you think of today.  Granted, people like Stalin ruined it for us, but it wouldn't hurt any one of us to do our research on Socialism and Communism.  They're not as fascist, dictorial, and "evil" as you may think.

Jewbroni~

Thanks for the quick reply- I just received the document and will read it eargerly.

On the contrary, the socialism being pursued today [b]is[/b] as fascist, dictatorial and "evil" as most think - because it's not [i]voluntary[/i].  It's imposed by the force of government.  It's socialism at gunpoint.  That's the point of the essays - to explain that what these people advocate isn't what they THINK they're advocating, and when you call them a Socialist it means something other than "you're evil".  

Socialism is a marvelous [b]ideal[/b] but it totally ignores human nature.  It [i]can[/i] work, but only for relatively small groups, and it [i]must[/i] have a way to deal with those who [u]don't want to cooperate[/u].  The USSR dealt with non-cooperation by putting the worst dissenters in a gulag.  That kept the less brave in line.  In Cambodia they did "re-education" - AKA: a bullet behind the ear.

Remember Hillary's plan for "universal health care"?  No one could pay cash for medical services OUTSIDE the plan?  If you did there were HUGE fines and jail time involved for both you and the doctor?  Doesn't [b]that[/b] give you the warm fuzzies?

Calling someone a Socialist should not be a pejorative.  It should mean something that our side of the discussion should understand implicitly.

[sniper]

There people go, not making clear distinctions between the concepts of "ideals" and "results".

Do your homework kiddies.

Jewbroni~

On the contrary - I understand the difference between "ideals" and "results" perfectly.  I also understand the difference between utopia and reality.  Marx described a utopian system - a system that was most closely approached by the United States via the labor movement of the 1950's - and which was then destroyed by the "Red Scare" of the same period.

That's the problem with utopian ideas - they're easily thwarted by people with not so utopian ideas.  

However, education is a good thing, and that's why I offered the essays to anyone who wanted to read them.

[sniper]

Jeez! An allusion to Marx. Not Groucho or Harpo either.

Here's an interesting socialist model: The "people" owning the means of production. Where does this happen??? On the internet in forums.

Run that up the flagpole and see who salutes!

[moon]

OK, I admit I've been a socialist basher most of my life... [:I]

Every chance I get, I speak out against the many socialist incursions---in o' so many forms--into our daily lives.
There is no such thing as benign socialism, and if Americans en masse don't wake up to it soon, they shall one day drown in it as a nation.

KBaker, I put in for my copy. Please be sure to include the author's name to give due credit.
Appreciate the effort you are putting forward.


Mr. Jewbroni, sir,
I would admonish you to do "your homework" and freshen-up on history. There you will find a plethora of case examples where the  altruistic "ideals" espoused by "true" and purist socialists have wreaked so much death and misery upon this small world we have.
I grant you this, where it was not by direct result (pure & clean ideals), then it was by grand scheme of deceit perpetrated on the ignorant masses. Socialism can easily work a two-pronged attack upon societies, and this is what makes it so pervasive. In all cases, the results are similar: tragic.
Care to rewrite history??

Furthermore,
NaZi = National Socialism
Yes, I sure do equate them in all their forms.
As they say, "Same sh!t, different pile..."
I like to think of fascism as socialism's big, mean brother. He's very impulsive, has a  tendency to be reckless and has little patience to run the program smoothly and g-r-a-d-u-a-l-l-y. He knows nothing of "eeeeasy does it"!

*****If we cannot judge the ideal by the result, then how can the ideal ever be worthy of being considered??*****

Yes, socialism in my household IS a dirty word.

Look, im to lazy to get into my email account so if you would just throw it my way to [email protected] i'd appreciate it.

NSF

I'm not sure what you people did more: over-analyze, or completely overlook what I was talking about.  I'll choose the latter, since you still haven't gotten it through your craniums yet.  That's allright, I'll speeeak sloooowwly for you (j/k).

I'm not a history major; I have no desire to "do my homework" on a subject that I don't need to know fluently.  I did, however, right an outstanding thesis titled "The Chronology of Communism" in my Freshman (or was it sophomore) History class.  KBaker, if you want to send me the essay on socialism, I would be glad to take a glimpse at it (check my email address listed here).

Again, some of you have just misunderstood me.  I know what socialism can and HAS done to some nations (although I'm not as well versed as with Marxism, etc).  The same goes for Communism.  I was simply stating the "ideals" that have been brought forth, particularly in the 19th century of Engel's and Marx's time.  I can logically seperate idealogy from history, I just enjoy reading works of idealogy more - history is a succession of events, while ideals are more prone to scientific research b/c they are theories).  

This is simply along the lines of what I'm adding to the discussion:  go pick up a copy of "The Principles of Communism" by Fredrick Engels or "Manifesto of the Communist Party" at your local library.   I'm on your side, KBaker, I suppose people just misunderstood me because they thought I was repeating what you had already said...just adding my own food for thought into the argument, that's all [:)].  But yes, I'd rather enjoy one of your essays on Socialism.  Email one of them to me at your convenience.

Jewbroni~

P.S. - Replace the word "Socialism" in your original topic with "Communism" since that is more of my expertise.  That is what I was trying to convey.  My apologies for the mixup.

Sorry about the delay, Jewbroni, but the essay will be on its way to you shortly.

Did anybody I sent these to read them and have a comment?

[sniper]