Why do so many Ron Paul members doubt the dangers of socialism?

[The Rebel Poet]

Regarding the original debate, it seems like you guys don't all use the same definition of socialism nor the same definition of collapse. Try agreeing to definitions first.

 

[acptulsa]

Unprecedented my ass! How many bullets has Trump taken??

There's a bottom line for you. +rep

We can't get a Paul nominated because Republicans would literally rather get suckered again than admit they got suckered before.

They aren't cats. Herding them is easy. Easy.

 

[juleswin]

Regarding the original debate, it seems like you guys don't all use the same definition of socialism nor the same definition of collapse. Try agreeing to definitions first.

Good points made but its not just the definition of socialism but what level of socialism that can lead to a "collapse". Some people say that Venezuela buying majority shares of private companies is the height of socialism but the US frequently seizes public property all the time(claiming terrorism and such). During the economic crisis, the US took control of Chrysler and bought off the current shareholders in what many analysts(share holders sued and lost) say was a bad deal and yet people still continue doing business in the US.

 

[Todd]

How about centralized govt management?

Oh...you mean Hyper Socialism, Hyper Colllectivism

Any institution that is not libertarian and classically liberal will, over time, become collectivist and statist. - John O'Sullivan's First Law

 

[juleswin]

Oh...you mean Hyper Socialism, Hyper Colllectivism

Any institution that is not libertarian and classically liberal will, over time, become collectivist and statist. - John O'Sullivan's First Law

Any institution that is not libertarian and classically liberal will, over time, become collectivist and statist......and then go on to conquerer the world. Jules Winfield

 

[Madison320]

Regarding the original debate, it seems like you guys don't all use the same definition of socialism nor the same definition of collapse. Try agreeing to definitions first.

I define socialism as a system where the needs of the state are placed above the rights of the individual. The important point that many here are missing is that it's a sliding scale between capitalism and socialism. All out capitalism is the same as libertarianism. All out socialism is communism although I don't really get too hung up on terms. The point is how much government control exists.

Venezeuela went from a mixed economy to all out socialism/communism in a short period of time. Nationalizing corporations is about as severe a move in the direction of socialism as you can get. For example socialized health care is only a small move in the direction of socialism compared to randomly confiscating private property. That's why it should be no surprise that Venezuela went from a relatively prosperous middle class economy to a mess in a short period of time.

So again my point is that a small move towards socialism isn't going to cause a collapse but a big move is. And Venezuela made about the biggest move possible. Only all out communist revolutions like the USSR and Cuba are more severe moves.

The other point is that EVERYONE says they are against socialism on a general level. But then they contradict themselves when you get down to the detail level.

 

[Superfluous Man]

He said he would put Hillary in jail. What else would he do?

The obvious answer to that is not put Hillary in jail, which every smart person knew was what would actually happen, and they were proved right.

 

[Superfluous Man]

I define socialism as a system where the needs of the state are placed above the rights of the individual.

Another word for that is statism. And all states that have ever existed fit this definition.

 

[Madison320]

More than a couple decades. We're at the 'corrupt crony' stage right now... its peak, arguably. If the US goes full central planned socialist, it will take a very, very long time for the inevitable slow decline to finally end the country.

If the US nationalized most of its corporations like Venezuela, it would only take a few years.

 

[Madison320]

By the way, we already have full blown socialism, by any objective measure.

Not even close. All out socialism = communism where no one is even permitted to own private property.

 

[Madison320]

Another word for that is statism. And all states that have ever existed fit this definition.

Yup. Statism is really a more accurate term.

But it's a sliding scale. A little statism doesn't cause much damage, but a lot will.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Not even close. All out socialism = communism where no one is even permitted to own private property.

That seems to be the current “textbook” definition. Marx wouldn’t agree. Interesting subject though...

Chris Rosini talks about the “texbook” version of Socialism being nationalization of the means of production (~5 minute mark). He basically says that the government has found a work-around on that with so much business being dependent on government contracts.

But the definition of socialism seems to have changed over time. Marx did not like socialism, as it was just a way for the Aristocrat/Plutocrat establishment to maintain control of the masses by taxing and than handing out some crumbs. Now people defend socialism by saying, “but there is still (some) private property, and the government hasn’t nationalized (everything), it’s not really (textbook) socialism”.

It seems as though conflating various forms of socialism with absolute Marxist communism has been done to create a huge gray area and buffer zone for the various forms of socialism to flourish, while pretending it’s not “textbook socialism”. Who rewrote those “texbook” definitions? Maybe it should just be called IngSoc.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

The obvious answer to that is not put Hillary in jail, which every smart person knew was what would actually happen, and they were proved right.

Most people realized it was hyperbole. The swamp was not amused, and was not willing to risk it. Even if there was a slight chance he would carry through with it, they had to act.

 

[Madison320]

That seems to be the current “textbook” definition. Marx wouldn’t agree. Interesting subject though...

There's never going to be a pure system. Just varying degrees. The point is that Venezuela went from a mixed economy to all out statism where private property is more or less abolished, in a short period of time.

Maybe that's the issue. Maybe most people here don't realize how drastically Venezuela shifted to statism.

I'll post this again:

Factbox: Venezuela's nationalizations under Chavez
6 MIN READ

(Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was re-elected on Sunday to another six-year term, potentially extending his rule to two decades and cementing his status as a dominant figure in modern Latin American history.

In 14 years in office, Chavez has nationalized major swaths of the OPEC nation’s economy as part of a socialist agenda.

Venezuelans expect more takeovers to come, possibly in the banking, health and food sectors.

Below are the main nationalizations under Chavez:

OIL
* In 2007, Chavez’s government took a majority stake in four oil projects in the vast Orinoco heavy crude belt worth an estimated $30 billion in total.

Exxon Mobil Corp and ConocoPhillips quit the country as a result and filed arbitration claims. Late last year, an arbitration panel ordered Venezuela to pay Exxon $908 million, though a larger case is still ongoing.

France’s Total SA and Norway’s StatoilHydro ASA received about $1 billion in compensation after reducing their holdings. Britain’s BP Plc and America’s Chevron Corp remained as minority partners.

* In 2008, Chavez’s administration implemented a windfall tax of 50 percent for prices over $70 per barrel, and 60 percent on oil over $100. Oil reached $147 that year, but soon slumped.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISING


* In 2009, Chavez seized a major gas injection project belonging to Williams Cos Inc and a range of assets from local service companies. This year, the energy minister said the government would pay $420 million to Williams and one of its U.S. partners, Exterran Holdings, for the takeover.

* In June 2010, the government seized 11 oil rigs from Oklahoma-based Helmerich & Payne Inc.

AGRICULTURE
* In 2009, Chavez nationalized a rice mill operated by a local unit of U.S. food giant Cargill Inc.

* In October 2010, Venezuela nationalized Fertinitro, one of the world’s biggest producers of nitrogen fertilizer, as well as Agroislena, a major local agricultural supply company. It also said it would take control of nearly 200,000 hectares (494,000 acres) of land owned by British meat company Vestey Foods.

* Vestey had already filed for arbitration over the earlier takeover of a ranch. Chavez said the latest deal with Vestey was a “friendly agreement.”

* In 2005, Chavez began implementing a 2001 law letting the state expropriate unproductive farms or seize land without proper titles. He has redistributed millions of acres deemed idle to boost food production and ease rural poverty.

* Chavez’s government has repeatedly threatened to seize Empresas Polar, Venezuela’s biggest employer and largest brewer and food processor.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISING


FINANCE
* In June 2010, Venezuela took over the mid-sized bank Banco Federal, citing liquidity problems and risk of fraud. The bank was closely linked to anti-government TV station Globovision.

* In 2009, Chavez paid $1 billion for Banco de Venezuela, a division of Spanish bank Grupo Santander.

* The government has closed a dozen small banks since November 2009 for what it said were operational irregularities. Some were reopened as state-run firms. Brokerages have also been closed and some employees jailed. Chavez has vowed to nationalize any bank that fails to meet government lending guidelines or is in financial trouble.

INDUSTRY
* In October 2010, Chavez ordered the takeover of the local operations of Owens Illinois Inc, which describes itself as the world’s largest glass container maker.

* Chavez in April 2008 announced the government takeover of the cement sector, targeting Switzerland’s Holcim Ltd, France’s Lafarge SA, and Mexico’s Cemex SAB de CV.

GOLD
* Chavez has considered bringing mining more firmly into state hands, and in 2009 the mining ministry seized Gold Reserve Inc’s Brisas project, which sits on one of Latin America’s largest gold veins. Gold Reserve immediately filed for arbitration with ICSID.

Pence, allies take new steps against Maduro
* In August 2011, Chavez said he was nationalizing the gold industry. Toronto-listed Rusoro Mining Ltd, owned by Russia’s Agapov family, was the only large gold miner operating in Venezuela, and this year it filed for arbitration.

STEEL
* The government paid $2 billion in 2009 for Argentine-led Ternium SA’s stake in Venezuela’s largest steel mill.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
* In 2007, the nation’s largest telecommunications company CANTV was nationalized after the government bought out the U.S.-based Verizon Communications Inc’s 28.5 percent stake for $572 million. Analysts said Verizon received fair compensations for its assets.

POWER
* In 2007, Venezuela expropriated the assets of U.S.-based AES Corp in Electricidad de Caracas, the nation’s largest private power producer. The government paid AES $740 million for its 82 percent stake in the company. Analysts described the deal as fair for AES.

TRANSPORT
* In September 2011, the government nationalized a local ferry company, Conferry, which operates from the mainland to the resort island of Margarita. Conferry is owned by a wealthy family and began operating in 1959.

TOURISM
* In October 2011, Chavez said his government would seize private homes on the Los Roques archipelago in the Caribbean and use them for state-run tourism. The islands are among the nation’s favorite and most expensive tourist spots, with pristine white beaches and coral reefs that teem with sea life.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-v...89701X20121008

But wait there's more!:

Under Presidents Chavez and Maduro, the Venezuelan government has long maintained a system of price controls aimed at guaranteeing affordable consumer goods for the population.


https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13515

 

[UWDude]

I'm not lying. Sorry if that bursts your little bubble. Bit hey. Thanks for your contribution to this thread.

Bob Dole got the same treatment as trump. You literally tried to play that off as truth. tard.

Most people realized it was hyperbole. The swamp was not amused, and was not willing to risk it. Even if there was a slight chance he would carry through with it, they had to act.

It depended on how popular he got. And it still can happen. Maybe after 2020.

 

[Anti Globalist]

To be fair its hard to find somebody to prosecute Hillary knowing that most people in government are out for themselves. Not to mention Clinton can sucessfully threaten anybody who even attempts to.

 

[acptulsa]

Bob Dole got the same treatment as trump. You literally tried to play that off as truth.

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/11/08/us/how-bob-dole-s-dream-was-dashed.html

tard.

You certainly are fond of that good old Freudian projection.

 

[Superfluous Man]

It depended on how popular he got. And it still can happen. Maybe after 2020.

It *can* happen. But it's not something Trump has any interest at all in doing.

 

[CCTelander]

Or it fails because the United States does not want the world to see socialist countries, like Iraq, Syria, and Libya succeed, so they utterly destroy them.

Libya

Libya

Libya was a successful socialist nation

Libya

Libya

Libya had no real economic crisis.

Libya

Libya

Libya is a capitalist shithole now.

Just to clarify for the sake of fairness, you're saying that socialism is, in fact, a viable economic model at least in some instances? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly.

 

[juleswin]

Or it fails because the United States does not want the world to see socialist countries, like Iraq, Syria, and Libya succeed, so they utterly destroy them.

Libya

Libya

Libya was a successful socialist nation

Libya

Libya

Libya had no real economic crisis.

Libya

Libya

Libya is a capitalist $#@!hole now.

And just like every independent socialist country, Libya was sanctioned by the US and the west. Imagine how well it would have done without the sanctions?