User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:01:49 PM EDT
[#1]
Control you
allow you to have what they think you need. No more than that. Lack of freedom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:03:13 PM EDT
[#2]
Holding mock elections that require people to believe they are voting for candidates who represent their values and belies, then allowing elected individuals to hold whatever power they want with no regard for the people
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:03:14 PM EDT
[#3]
When your freedom and hard earned money is taken for the supposed greater good...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:03:21 PM EDT
[#4]
Extortion from some to insure votes from others.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:04:06 PM EDT
[#5]
And can someone clarify the difference between Socialist & Fascist for me?
Socialist: When things are done for the social good, run amuck. The opposite of a free market and independence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:04:40 PM EDT
[#6]
Nothing is mine.
Nothing is yours. It's all ours. Which means it's theirs! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:05:08 PM EDT
[#7]
cowardice breeding failure
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:05:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Clinton, Bush, (both sets) US, EU, Venezuela, Cuba
Oh, and socialists only care about results, not how they got there, they don't give a damn about rules if they are in their way (why I violated yours) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:06:13 PM EDT
[#9]
Big government ownership of services Vs. Government just controlling coporations. Think of Facism as corporatism. Hitler said it "Why own it when you can just control it." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:06:21 PM EDT
[#10]
Socialism is synonymous with the word failure.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:09:18 PM EDT
[#11]
arfcom definition: anyone to the left of me.
if you're *really* left of me, you're a communist |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:09:28 PM EDT
[#12]
Making everyone equal by making sure they have nothing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:09:59 PM EDT
[#13]
I would say Big Brother getting involved in our personal lives. Telling us how to live, telling us how to think. Not being able to own our own property . National health care and of course, not being able to own a firearm.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:16 PM EDT
[#14]
Socialism is government mandated wealth redistribution and class-melding, while private property is still possible, and with elected Government.
Communism is the same as above, though sans private property, and sans elected government. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:28 PM EDT
[#15]
The good/interests/will of the many out weigh the rights and interests of the few/individual
Want a socialist environment? The military. Needs of the service come first. Mission comes first, lives and rights of the men come a distant second. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:33 PM EDT
[#16]
So what is it called when instead of the government running business, business runs the government? Msicaf? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:35 PM EDT
[#17]
Socialism is an economic philosophy where as Fascim is a philosophy that encompasses the entire scope of the society and requires an autocratic dictator where as socialism does not. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:37 PM EDT
[#18]
Communism with more patience.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:38 PM EDT
[#19]
social and economic equality, except for those running the country
 no free market, no private property, property belongs to society for all to use and enjoy. opposite of capitalism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:10:41 PM EDT
[#20]
Gov = Shepherd
population = Sheep You get the picture 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:11:00 PM EDT
[#21]
The use of government power to manipulate or control economic activity, with the intent of preventing or restraining the natural operation of the laws of economics for the ostensible good of society, with the caveat that government action that ensures the operation of the laws of economics (such as Anti-Trust legislation), and taxation intended purely to pay for the cost of government is NOT socialism...
Examples would include: 1) Welfare 2) Tariffs & Production Subsidies 3) Price & wage floors or cielings (to include any sort of minimum wage) 4) Government control or nationalization of any industry or sector of the economy 5) Legislation or regulation enacted with the intent of forcing employers to hire more employees than would normally be done under deregulated conditions (such as 30hr work weeks, 6hr work days)... 6) Legislation requiring employers to provide any sort of benefit or compensation to employees above and beyond monetary wages. P.S. The above is 100% original, 100% top-of-my-head... I'm sure I missed one or two items... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:12:27 PM EDT
[#22]
slavery to the government
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:13:27 PM EDT
[#23]
Lobbying? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:14:38 PM EDT
[#24]
I challange the premise of the title, which implies that individuals can define socialism for themselves, therefore there are multiple definitions of socialism.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:15:19 PM EDT
[#25]
Medicare, Social Security, Welfare.
Do I think socialism is a bad thing? When left in the hands of the federal government I do, but handled at a local or state level I am fine with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:15:35 PM EDT
[#26]
To each, according to their need.
From each, according to their ability. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:16:02 PM EDT
[#27]
The Bush Administration. 
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:16:33 PM EDT
[#28]
corporatism (sort of) |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:17:52 PM EDT
[#29]
Fascism is privately owned property controlled by the government.
Think Mussolini in Italy during WWII. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:20:52 PM EDT
[#30]
No, there is one definition of socialism. I want to see if you know what that definition is, or have a pretty close idea as to what it is without you looking up the actual definition. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:24:54 PM EDT
[#31]
No difference. Thats why the Germans wer called "Nazis" - short for NATIONAL SOCIALISM. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:25:39 PM EDT
[#32]
I agree! In our post modern way of thinking, people try to define their own reality and anything can mean anything they want it to. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:26:01 PM EDT
[#33]
Redistribution of wealth and property for the "collective good". Equality through misery. Oppression.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:26:18 PM EDT
[#34]
Is retardism a word?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:27:41 PM EDT
[#35]
What the Germans called National Socialism was not socialism. It was Fascism. Several key elements of socialism were not present in Nazi Germany. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:28:08 PM EDT
[#36]
"CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM" |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:30:11 PM EDT
[#37]
The gov't takes your income, and redistributes it therby equalizing your income. In the end, those who make more will work less and thereby all income eventually becomes equal. Total productivity will decrease as slacking off will be the key to equalizing fairness to the reduced income you now receive.
The whole pie eventually disappears as workers don't produce. Look at Communist Russia! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:30:52 PM EDT
[#38]
R - I - G - H - T ... |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:33:34 PM EDT
[#39]
Creating a level "playing field" by taking from the contributors of society and giving to those who do not (but can) contribute. Would-be socialists feel justified in their Robin Hood-esque ideology because it sounds good to the deadbeats and ensures an on-going position of power for the socialist. The ultimate goal is a centrally controlled, all-powerful government.
Blake |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:36:44 PM EDT
[#40]
Fascism is pragmatic socialism. In true socialism, everyone works for the common good. There is no private property--all ownership is communal, at least with respect to the means of production. Fascism allows private ownership, but under fascism production is controlled for the greater good. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:38:39 PM EDT
[#41]
R - I - G - H - T ... ...just like all those "Communist" countires failed because they "...didn't really impliment pure communism. Nice try. "Nazism" was marketed, and implimented, as a socialist alternative to Marxism. SOme industries they nationalized. Other industries they didn't bother - they just told you what you would produce and who and how many would produce it - or up against the wall. The results were, in effect, socialism. Just like the name sez... |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:39:08 PM EDT
[#42]
Well said, but you left out, leaving a small core of I've got mines who are in control and who don't participate in the TAX. Wealthy Dem's do this now through "Foundations" which pass on their wealth with out tax. These same Dem's shout about the need to confiscate more while using more energy and paying little tax and wasting more resources than any ten thousand who participate in the tax paying. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:40:39 PM EDT
[#43]
Taking away freedom/finances to give to others for the "common good"
ie. BS 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:46:46 PM EDT
[#44]
Socialism always has two inherent problem: 1) Incentives (or the lack of). 2) Lack of information (no feedback mechinism). The thing about incentives is: true socialism provides no incentive to produce, only an incentive to consume. This was even obvious on a small scale with the initial English colonies in America, where food was a communial property (and consequently so was starvation). For this reason, we have few examples of "true socialism", since experiments like the USSR quickly fold into something else (let's call this "other thing" fascism for the time being). The thing about information is that under socialism there is no money (or, like in the USSR there is money but prices are set by the government). Without real money and a relationship between price and demand, producers don't know what is wanted/needed, and consumers don't know what is in short supply. Essentially, in a functioning market prices provide a feedback loop for producers, and socialism breaks this loop. Socialism is ALWAYS a bad thing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:47:05 PM EDT
[#45]
Socialists ( Lefties...Democrats...Progressives );
All want simply to save the world With YOUR money
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:50:17 PM EDT
[#46]
Socialism = compassion by proxy
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:51:15 PM EDT
[#47]
No, that isn't correct. First off, the communist countries that failed never made it to communism. Communism is a sort of nirvana for socialism where communal living falls into place without government interaction. Socialism is a step towards communism. As far as Nazi Germany goes, the state did not own the industries in the state, it did not set wages for employees, it did not prevent private profit and it did not eliminate the ownership of private property (except for Jews, and that was for racist reasons, not economic reasons). Also, in Nazi Germany everything was controlled by Hitler. Hitler was the sole power in the country and everything below Hitler was an extension of his power. Stalin came close to this in the Soviet Union, but he was not the rule for socialist leaders. In general leaders in the Soviet Union were presidents of the party, but the PARTY was the ultimate power. Kruschev, Brezhnev and Gorbachev were all limited by having to keep the party bosses happy and not straying too far from the party's approval. Hitler was completely unrestricted in his power over Germany. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:53:01 PM EDT
[#48]
Contempt for the able.
Or, Pure unadulterated evil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:54:13 PM EDT
[#49]
Look at Al Gore, he travels the world preaching about how YOU should conserve resources and how you should feel honored to give to the poor through higher taxes; all the while living in multiple big houses and flying in private planes and utilizing tax loop holes. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2007 12:57:11 PM EDT
[#50]
Define socialism? Easy. The state of our nation the day after Hillary Clinton takes the oath as POTUS.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
