Jump to content
270soft Forum

Bernie is running.


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, WVProgressive said:

As opposed to Free-Market Capitalism, an economic system that's responsible for at least 20 million deaths a year. What do you think Socialism actually is?

How is Capitalism responsible for 20 million deaths per year?

Socialism's pretty similar to Communism, but its requests are reasonable and I can tolerate it until it eventually transforms into Communism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

If you support Communism despite it murdering over 100 million people just because "iT wAsNt iMpLeMeNtEd RiGhT" you have a mental disability.

Bernie is a commie. Through and through. Strange though, as he was a witness to both Mao's ''Great Leap Forward' and the Soviet Union. Communism isn't even good on paper either.

Again, you don't understand Communism. There is not a single Communist in a significant elected position or with any true political visibility in the United States at present, despite political mudslinging. Also, I don't support Communism, I just happen to understand - as well as the difference of it's theory vs. it's application, and who is actually a Communist and whose just being slandered as such by political opponents - and that Communism has, indeed, failed in application - as surely and completely as the American Constitutional Government system and Capitalism have failed utterly, as well - the latter just have a tiny and powerful minority, who are the only still truly benefitting from said systems, forcing them to linger on life support.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WVProgressive said:

Literally never happened.

Stalin killed like 12 million people in the Gulags alone, and the famines were worth like 20 million deaths, Mao killed over 50 million people, and Cambodia, East Germany, Cuba, Colombia, and Vietnam killed a bunch of people too, which Commies like to forget about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patine said:

Again, you don't understand Communism. There is not a single Communist in a significant elected position or with any true political visibility in the United States at present, despite political mudslinging. Also, I don't support Communism, I just happen to understand - as well as the difference of it's theory vs. it's application, and who is actually a Communist and whose just being slandered as such by political opponents - and that Communism has, indeed, failed in application - as surely and completely as the American Constitutional Government system and Capitalism have failed utterly, as well - the latter just have a tiny and powerful minority, who are the only still truly benefitting from said systems, forcing them to linger on life support.

How has Capitalism failed when you are alive, well-fed, and typing your anti-capitalist rant from an electronic device in the safety of a capitalist country?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

How is Capitalism responsible for 20 million deaths per year?

Socialism's pretty similar to Communism, but its requests are reasonable and I can tolerate it until it eventually transforms into Communism.

You want to know about 20 million deaths per year? Read about death due to corporate predation, exploitation, and horrid work conditions, wars that resource, contracting, and arms corporations lobby the U.S. and other national governments to find casus bellis for and fight (the Iraq War that began in 2003 comes to mind), people dying from starvation, and the effects of being homeless of unemployment rates created by corporate mergers, layoffs, or mismanagement, or rising food and housing prices completely out of proportion in various areas, medicinal costs rising because of "patent treaties" against generic medications, the poisons in the food, water, air, etc. you consume building up into cancers because of poor environmental "dumping' policies, and many others, I'm pretty sure racks up somewhere around 20 million deaths a year - AT LEAST.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

How has Capitalism failed when you are alive, well-fed, and typing your anti-capitalist rant from an electronic device in the safety of a capitalist country?

I'm a social worker for a living. I know better than this cheap stereotype. And all of my clients are in the same Capitalist country as I am...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patine said:

 

No. It's because the political Duopoly has the electoral system of funding, ballot access, visibility, publicly paid for funding of Duopoly primaries, "dirty-pool" tactics to marginalize outside candidates, a fatalistic sense ingrained in voters that only the two main parties can EVER win, public voter education dominated by the two major parties with Third Parties/Independent only ever mentioned as a side-note concept, and the horrid, outdated, anachronistic, and unrepresentative Electoral College that forces a two-party system and cheats the voters and their again and again. Plus, the Republican and Democratic Parties are NOT proper and functional political parties by the standards of more politically-healthy First World multi-party systems - their forced, unstable, and tumultuous coalitions lacking in true cohesion and only forced together by the U.S. Constitutional system - which may have been the greatest and most novel in the world in the late 18th Century, but has since lagged behind many other First World systems - and the U.S. political would be far healthier and far better served if the camps represented within were allowed to break along their natural fault-lines into separate and more functional, but multiple parties. Also, Third Parties do not INHERENTLY suck by nature and as a concept - it's just that the corrupt system and the deck is institutionally stacked against them and they only flourish at all by taking extreme niches usually neglected by the two major parties.

Third parties here in America suck. If a good one actually came along then maybe they would actually win some votes/seats. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

I agree. I love Sanders' platform and vision for the US; however he is too old to run. If he was 50 or 60, I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. However, if he were elected, the stress of the office could mean a heartbeat away from VP Harris being president.

What makes you think Harris would be VP? I have to imagine Sanders would pick somebody progressive as his running mate, and Harris is far from that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

How is Capitalism responsible for 20 million deaths per year?

Around the world 8 million people die from lack of clean drinking water ,7 and a half million from hunger, and 3 million from vaccine preventable diseases, and that's just one year, and only a few causes of death, capitalism has killed far more than communism ever did.

10 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Stalin killed like 12 million people in the Gulags alone, and the famines were worth like 20 million deaths, Mao killed over 50 million people, and Cambodia, East Germany, Cuba, Colombia, and Vietnam killed a bunch of people too, which Commies like to forget about.

I see, you're using the black book as your main source, I can safely ignore all your attempts to be taken as an authority on "deaths by gommulism"

1 minute ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

How has Capitalism failed when you are alive, well-fed, and typing your anti-capitalist rant from an electronic device in the safety of a capitalist country?

"You criticize feudalism, yet you live in a feudal society, checkmate Jacobins"

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jnewt said:

What makes you think Harris would be VP? I have to imagine Sanders would pick somebody progressive as his running mate, and Harris is far from that.

Ideologically balance the ticket. As much as I love Sanders, I know there are moderate Democrats that are cautious towards him and would like reassurances from him that he won't go too far to the left. Take Trump and the religious right. Many were cautious towards him during the primary, but quickly backed him once Pence became VP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

If you support Communism despite it murdering over 100 million people just because "iT wAsNt iMpLeMeNtEd RiGhT" you have a mental disability.

Bernie is a commie. Through and through. Strange though, as he was a witness to both Mao's ''Great Leap Forward' and the Soviet Union. Communism isn't even good on paper either.

If you genuinely believe this, you are very short on mental acuity yourself. Bernie Sanders isn't even a socialist, let alone a communist. There's huge differences between social democracy, socialism, and communism. Read a book.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jnewt said:

If you genuinely believe this, you are very short on mental acuity yourself. Bernie Sanders isn't even a socialist, let alone a communist. There's huge differences between social democracy, socialism, and communism. Read a book.

Thank you! It boggles the mind how someone can see welfare capitalism, and actual socialism, and think their the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

Ideologically balance the ticket. As much as I love Sanders, I know there are moderate Democrats that are cautious towards him and would like reassurances from him that he won't go too far to the left. Take Trump and the religious right. Many were cautious towards him during the primary, but quickly backed him once Pence became VP.

Ehhh, I don't see Sanders picking someone to ideologically balance the ticket. I can definitely see him pick someone to balance the ticket in other ways, but I don't see him picking someone progressives would disapprove of that much. I could be wrong, though, it would just surprise me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jnewt said:

Ehhh, I don't see Sanders picking someone to ideologically balance the ticket. I can definitely see him pick someone to balance the ticket in other ways, but I don't see him picking someone progressives would disapprove of that much. I could be wrong, though, it would just surprise me.

How else could he balance a ticket? Im curious. I see ideology being the easiest(plus Harris is way younger than him, and is also non-white). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WVProgressive said:

Around the world 8 million people die from lack of clean drinking water ,7 and a half million from hunger, and 3 million from vaccine preventable diseases, and that's just one year, and only a few causes of death, capitalism has killed far more than communism ever did.

3

Seems a little irresponsible to blame all deaths from undeveloped countries on capitalism. Especially when those are a minority of capitalist countries, and literally every Communist country has had issues with starvation, even in the modern days (North Korea, though it has taken steps in the right direction as of recently)

2 minutes ago, WVProgressive said:

I see, you're using the black book as your main source, I can safely ignore all your attempts to be taken as an authority on "deaths by gommulism"

2

Not sure what the 'Black Book' is but just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean your ideology hasn't murdered or starved an amount of people equal to the amount of a top 10 country.

8 minutes ago, WVProgressive said:

"You criticize feudalism, yet you live in a feudal society, checkmate Jacobins"

 

lol

6 minutes ago, jnewt said:

If you genuinely believe this, you are very short on mental acuity yourself. Bernie Sanders isn't even a socialist, let alone a communist. There's huge differences between social democracy, socialism, and communism. Read a book.

The end goal of Socialism is to eventually achieve full Communism. I have no problem with Socialism, and recognize it as a legitimate ideology, until it begins to radicalize towards Communism. I am a proponent for economic safety nets and all, but I just don't support people who advocate for a system that has to slaughter the upper and lower class to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sunnymentoaddict said:

How else could he balance a ticket? Im curious. I see ideology being the easiest(plus Harris is way younger than him, and is also non-white). 

I'm not sure who he would pick, but I could see him picking a not-so-well-known progressive who is significantly younger than him, a minority, and/or a woman. I would be disappointed, but I could see him picking Tulsi Gabbard. I could also see him picking someone most of us have never heard of.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jnewt said:

I'm not sure who he would pick, but I could see him picking a not-so-well-known progressive who is significantly younger than him, a minority, and/or a woman. I would be disappointed, but I could see him picking Tulsi Gabbard. I could also see him picking someone most of us have never heard of.

Ruben Gallego ? Young, veteran, hispanic, progressive(also from a safe seat, so not to lose it- as with the case of Senator Brown). I could see him as someone that check off all of your boxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

The end goal of Socialism is to eventually achieve full Communism. I have no problem with Socialism, and recognize it as a legitimate ideology, until it begins to radicalize towards Communism. I am a proponent for economic safety nets and all, but I just don't support people who advocate for a system that has to slaughter the upper and lower class to work.

I think proper and holistic education, free from the myth, legends, and fairy tales that seem so prevalent today, even at the highest and "most respected" levels of American discourse, about sociology, politics, economics, history, and geography, in a GLOBAL,  and not just parochial and national perspective - in the United States' education system would be an IMMENSELY bigger step to "making America great again," than ANY of Trump's lame-brained, populist-appeal pablum policies, to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

The end goal of Socialism is to eventually achieve full Communism. I have no problem with Socialism, and recognize it as a legitimate ideology, until it begins to radicalize towards Communism. I am a proponent for economic safety nets and all, but I just don't support people who advocate for a system that has to slaughter the upper and lower class to work.

Socialism's end goal is not communism. You're taking a single quote and trying to pass it off as an absolute just because a proponent of communism said it. Socialism doesn't call for the complete abolition of government and the state like communism does. Plus, you're still missing the point - Bernie Sanders is neither a socialist nor a communist. I'm not sure why you keep talking about socialism and communism in reference to him. He's a social democrat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jnewt said:

Socialism's end goal is not communism. You're taking a single quote and trying to pass it off as an absolute just because a proponent of communism said it. Socialism doesn't call for the complete abolition of government and the state like communism does. Plus, you're still missing the point - Bernie Sanders is neither a socialist nor a communist. I'm not sure why you keep talking about socialism and communism in reference to him. He's a social democrat.

Thank you for explaining that part. I always thought Bernie always described himself as an "Independent Socialist from Vermont" or something. Not too sure what a Social Democrat is. Sounds like a synonym to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

Ruben Gallego ? Young, veteran, hispanic, progressive(also from a safe seat, so not to lose it- as with the case of Senator Brown). I could see him as someone that check off all of your boxes.

Possibly. I could definitely see somebody else like him being considered, at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Thank you for explaining that part. I always thought Bernie always described himself as an "Independent Socialist from Vermont" or something. Not too sure what a Social Democrat is. Sounds like a synonym to me.

It isn't. He just wants a strong social safety net within the confines of capitalism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Thank you for explaining that part. I always thought Bernie always described himself as an "Independent Socialist from Vermont" or something. Not too sure what a Social Democrat is. Sounds like a synonym to me.

That's because you lack education on the topic, but insist on speaking on it as though you had knowledge on it, and, like the very many other people who do that today, sound like a fool when you speak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...