Being a Socialist in America

Well of course they don't have a right to hurt people, but like it's going to stop them. The law itself abuses laws to hurt people. There will always be people that will do this no matter what. Unless the majority becomes the ones that are all tolerant and such. Which then to me just comes back to everyone just needs to stop being a jerk.

 

Laws cannot change people. People can change people.

If you want to make a difference and spread your word, become a public speaker. Research solutions that governments have done in the past, review ancient civilizations, write to the government, etc.

Just make your voice heard somewhere; America will never turn into a socialist society in any means, but the least we can all do is fight for the rights that we don't have yet.

Human beings are naturally inclined to want to break limitations, and rules fall under the 'limitations' label. The psychology of the situation is a lot more complex than you'd think.

Eventually someone will think they can transcend these limitations and set out to break them. Very rarely is a positive outcome achieved by this, but that is because The Law is far too restricting.

 

actually i tend to agree here. i mean as a socialist i practice a very diffrent version.

step one the first jerk who says anything about "racial purity" or any such garbage, especially if he is a "skin head" or wears any nazi symbol on any of his clothing shall be killed in the most violent cold blooded manner i can to avoid the next nazi regime ever attempting to rise. i mean really we can't ever let ourselves repeat that mistake again, to many innocent people, both jews and non jews, died to teach us the hard way once. never again shall we allow a single man to have the power to murder on the scale that happened before. never again ever.

step 2 as far as taking out motivation. i like the way they did it in star trek. the advancement of ones chosen field motivates one to study, invent and all that.
creation and progress, as well as drive and passion were still there, they just evolved beyond buying things they didn't need because it had additives in it to make it taste better and be more addictive than homemade food. (it's true, look up how fast food works)
they had simply decided that instead of acquiring wealth being their motivation they would do whatever carreer one chose to do for the betterment of all and ones own personal quest of discovery, understanding and pursuit of the kind of wealth not stored in the bank but in ones own heart.

if we kill all nazis and anything else that wants to practice genocide, and then instead of greed if we are motivated by the acquisition of greater knowledge, advancement of science and arts, etc then we have the first to parts of utopia.


in short it's not lazy at all unless the people practicing it are foolish enough to allow themselves to be, and infact if you are motivated byt the things you really wish to obtain in life rather than simple cash you will both work harder and much more happily toward your true life's goals

 

I think you're delving too deep into what I said.

Humans are simplistic creatures who desire power over others; what you want would breed natural contempt and hatred for the systematic order because some want to have more than they've got.

Anarchy isn't necessarily a bad thing, either; but I don't particularly care for the prospect of Anarchism.

 

The concept of freedom has come up in this discussion, and I feel like it's fairly relevant to what we're talking about so I'm going to comment on it.

Our government (meaning the United States of America, the perspective from which I will be writing in this instance) was founded on the concept of "inalienable rights", among other things. Now, I'm no history buff but I think the fact that many people throughout history have not had the rights we are (supposedly) guaranteed indicates that our "inalienable rights" are not literally inalienable. That might seem like a simple concept to grasp, but I would add that there is only one right which all humans inherently possess: the right to choose. By the fact itself, every human is capable of choosing to do/be/say/think anything that s/he is capable of doing/being/saying/thinking. Even if you are bound, gagged and imprisoned you are still capable of deciding how you feel, as long as you are alive. That is our baseline, and I would remind everyone that anything beyond that right is a construct dictated by our system of government.

TL;DR - We really don't have any rights beyond what we create.

Some might argue that this very principle demands that we assist those in need of more equal rights, and others might counter by saying that such a statement asserts a certain set of ethics or personal beliefs over others and is thus self-contradictory because it does not create perfect equality between all people, it just changes who is equal and in what way. I believe both of those statements are true and that our system of government is based on a set of equally flawed and necessary principles, though which principles are necessary is still up for debate (and is likely the core subject of this thread).

TL;DR V2.0 - We need small, specific changes to our government: not big ones.

Insofar as "good" and "bad" are relative, I agree.

 

im not saying kill an entire race just the handful the walk with straight knees and praise hitler

 

Economic stagnation is ideal. America plans for infinite growth which is an impossible feat to achieve. A goal that drives up inflation and raises taxes far higher than they should be. What we need to do is level off and regulate the economy we rather than trying to keep growing and growing and growing. Because if we grow too large, we are bound to get crushed by our own weight and girth. In history when a nation or empire got too large and too quickly (and this can apply economically because 21st century empires are economic), they crumble within. Whether within society, by revolution, or infrastructure failure. This happened with Rome, Greece, Mongolia, the USSR, Nazi Germany, Japan, the Byzantines, the Arabs, Britain, Spain, Portugal, the Holy Roman Empire, Khmer, and France. You can't force being an uber powerful country or empire. That takes time. Centuries. Millenia. China managed to have a relatively stable government for 4000 years. Who says we can do the same?

Planning for infinite economic growth is one of the stupidest and most bull-headed ideas America has had. I refuse to support such a cause.

EDIT: And yeah, I'm aware that's a month old but felt I needed to say something.

 

You should shoot for stagnation and whenever it needs growth, give it growth. Perhaps I should have should have stated that better.

 

Well, I think we were both at fault then for not being clear enough. In any case, I do agree with you to an extent. No harm done!