Why is everyone so afraid of the word Socialism?

jfgordon1

Well-Known Member
Roosevelt wanted to be in the war. He just needed an excuse to enter it. He pissed off the Japanese enough where they attacked us and the rest is history.
 

jfgordon1

Well-Known Member
The banks funded him and helped him become that "brutal dictator".

Is it right that the people controlling our government created these wars and funded both sides of most major battles throughout history?
You have to love the Bush family :spew:

Documents: Bush's Grandfather Directed Bank Tied to Man Who Funded Hitler

Friday, October 17, 2003


  • Share:

WASHINGTON — President Bush's grandfather was a director of a bank seized by the federal government because of its ties to a German industrialist who helped bankroll Adolf Hitler's rise to power, government documents show.
Prescott Bush (search) was one of seven directors of Union Banking Corp. (search), a New York investment bank owned by a bank controlled by the Thyssen family, according to recently declassified National Archives documents reviewed by The Associated Press.
Fritz Thyssen (search) was an early financial supporter of Hitler, whose Nazi party Thyssen believed was preferable to communism. The documents do not show any evidence Bush directly aided that effort. His position with Union Banking never was a political issue for Bush, who was elected to the Senate from Connecticut in 1952.
Reports of Bush's involvement with the seized bank have been circulating on the Internet for years and have been reported by some mainstream media. The newly declassified documents provide additional details about the Union Banking-Thyssen connection.
Trent Duffy, a spokesman for President Bush, declined to comment.
Union Banking was owned by a Dutch bank, Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaardt N.V., which was "closely affiliated" with the German conglomerate United Steel Works, according to an Oct. 5, 1942, report from the federal Office of Alien Property Custodian. The Dutch bank and the steel firm were part of the business and financial empire of Thyssen and his brother, Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza, the report said.
The 4,000 Union Banking shares owned by the Dutch bank were registered in the names of the seven U.S. directors, according a document signed by Homer Jones, chief of the division of investigation and research of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, a World War II-era agency that no longer exists.
E. Roland Harriman, the bank chairman and brother of former New York Gov. W. Averell Harriman (search), held 3,991 shares. Bush had one share.
Both Harrimans and Bush were partners in the New York investment firm of Brown Brothers, Harriman and Co., which handled the financial transactions of the bank as well as other financial dealings with several other companies linked to Bank voor Handel that were confiscated by the U.S. government during World War II.
Union Banking was seized by the government in October 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act (search).
No charges were brought against Union Banking's American directors. The federal government was too busy trying to fight the war, said Donald Goldstein, a professor of public and international affairs at the University of Pittsburgh.
"We did not have the resources to do these things," Goldstein said.
Fritz Thyssen broke with the Nazis in 1938 over their persecution of Catholics and Jews, and fled to Switzerland. He later was arrested and spent 1941 to 1945 in a Nazi prison. His brother lived in Switzerland from 1932 to 1947 but continued to operate businesses in Germany.
The new documents were first reported by freelance writer John Buchanan in The New Hampshire Gazette.
Edit: source : http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html
 

SDSativa

Active Member
You know it is so easy to bring up Bush, but what relevance does he have to do with anything. And I don;t know why you libs hate him so much? Conservatives hate him for being too liberal, and liberals hate him for not being liberal enough.
 

jfgordon1

Well-Known Member
You know it is so easy to bring up Bush, but what relevance does he have to do with anything. And I don;t know why you libs hate him so much? Conservatives hate him for being too liberal, and liberals hate him for not being liberal enough.
We got it, everyone hates him.
 

Anonymiss1969

Active Member
You make a valid point.. but what you are reffering to is NOT socialism. It IS our tax dollars being put to good use (as rare as that is these days). If you wanna consider this socialism then fine, but it is not socialism even in its lowest form. The services you describe are services that everyone in the US, rich or poor, benefit from. A billionaire is not gonna hire a private fire company to extinguish his mansion if need be. And even rich folks use the public library (gasp!) On the other hand, I strongly oppose government programs that cater to the underachiever at the expense of the successful, and that is what socialism is all about. If you can't afford to put food in your child's mouth or take them to the doctor when they are sick, then you better get off your lazy ass and do something about it. Do not rely on those who strived for success to support you just because you can't even achieve the bare minimum.
This is, in fact, socialism. Everyone pays into something that they may never use, or they may use every day. It would make more sense for that rich person to be billed after the fire department saves his mansion, instead of paying for everyone else's houses to be saved when he could go his entire life not using the fire department.

You seem to condradict yourself with the fire department example and then saying people need to get off their asses to get their baby food.

Maybe if people were billed after services were used, they wouldn't rely so heavily on those of us who take responsibility for our lives. Unfortunately theres no way to show these bottom feeders (such as my aunt who walks around with a cane for "back pain" even though many doctors have told her she doesn't need the hydros or the cane) what kind of burden they are to us actual workers.
 

Anonymiss1969

Active Member
Yeah a single mother who needs government aid to take care of her autistic child needs to stop suckling the government teat, get off her ass and work harder.(preferably find a job that will allow her autistic child to come along)
My mom works with a lot of autistic kids and one child that she works with has a mother that went from being a heroine addict with 2 kids (one autistic) to getting off drugs and starting her own business.

Humans are capable of great things, but most of them are too lazy or don't have the diligence to actually make something of themselves because they know if they give up they can get free money.
 

ilkhan

Well-Known Member
All this socialism nonsence is crap.
We have plenty of government now.
Infact we have so much that it sucks up valuable resources.
Resources that could be used,
creating jobs,
manufacturing good,
Creating wealth for everyone.
Capitalism may not be perfect
but its a damn sight better then socialism.

The arguement that we need socialized institutions like the library is false.
We don't need these things if it means they must extort money fairly earned.
What it means is we are acustomed to them.
We could create private fire dept,
(although I could forsee problems with this in perticular, fire fighters makeing their own work)
We can have private police,
We can and probably should have private schools.

Anyway most of the things you listed are the domain of the states not the feds.
The Feds doing this is what I fear.
If a state does something dumb I can move away.
I can't really leave the country. (I can but who would have me and would I want them)
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
The "special needs" of this child go much further then daycare, but I didn't feel the need to go into details. The point I was trying to make is that there are situations where forms of welfare are necessary. Everyone is so quick to try and throw some of these programs away. If something is broken, fix it. Are people abusing these programs....probably. There definately needs to be some overhauling. I'm pretty sure last time I got a flat tire, I didn't throw my car away.
I'm pretty sure the last time I got a flat tire I paid for the repair and didn't force somebody else to. I'm pretty sure if I saw you by the side of the road with a flat tire I'd stop and VOLUNTARILY offer to help you.
 

Gropotkin

Member
Well, if you mean bureaucracy then yeah. Fjuk that noize.

But there are plenty of forms of socialism that are the opposite of Stalinist, Maoist, State Capitalist regimes that wave the red flag around and sing solidarity songs while pocketing the labor value of the proletariats.

Quick way to figure this out, go to wikipedia's page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism and check out all the anti-statist and directly democratic forms.

One good example of a form of socialism that is working right now is the mutual aid between Argentinian worker-controlled factories and the cooperation between a hospital and the Zanon factory. Not only do the factories trade services and parts that they need with each other but one factory provides a hospital with tiles and the hospital gives out free healthcare, whatever they need, to the workers therein.

Cooperation and egalitarian wealth distribution are attainable but we must guard our societies against power as it is universally known to corrupt. As for welfare - it makes sense to take care of all children because they will become part of the work force. All children deserve the same healthcare and education - they deserve the best any society can give them! Furthermore seniors deserve healthcare, housing, and food because they were once part of the workforce. At any one time all the people that workers would have to support will still not cost them more than bosses and corporate profits have.

The only thing more humiliating than slavery is choosing your own master - if we understood what the bosses, corporations, and land owners are stealing from us we wouldn't be debating on who the bigger f^^khead is between the Dems and Reps. We'd be forming our own mutual aid societies and disintegrating the state.

There is a documentary called The Take. If you have ever wondered whether worker self management is really feasible, even in market economies, you should watch this movie. Search torrent sites like speckly.com and onebigtorrent.com


All this socialism nonsence is crap.
We have plenty of government now.
Infact we have so much that it sucks up valuable resources.
Resources that could be used,
creating jobs,
manufacturing good,
Creating wealth for everyone.
Capitalism may not be perfect
but its a damn sight better then socialism.

The arguement that we need socialized institutions like the library is false.
We don't need these things if it means they must extort money fairly earned.
What it means is we are acustomed to them.
We could create private fire dept,
(although I could forsee problems with this in perticular, fire fighters makeing their own work)
We can have private police,
We can and probably should have private schools.

Anyway most of the things you listed are the domain of the states not the feds.
The Feds doing this is what I fear.
If a state does something dumb I can move away.
I can't really leave the country. (I can but who would have me and would I want them)
 

Gropotkin

Member
If you can't afford a kid, don't have one. Period.
Unless you have land where you practice sustainable homesteading and do not depend on petroleum and are commited to water conservation - you probably should not have a kid. Resources are finite and we are about to run head first into a brick wall. Peak Oil is one thing, but Peak Everything should be on our minds too.

Also, it doesn't make a lot of sense to make a child when there are already so many of them out there who need a loving family! As with pets like cats and dogs, we have so many human beings (for a number of reasons, not least of which is a cynical and apathetic approach by the US and other western countries when it comes to sex ed) that we should stop breeding whenever possible and adopt out the young ones that need a family already.

FUCK dog breeders. (/soapbox)
 

jrh72582

Well-Known Member
Well, if you mean bureaucracy then yeah. Fjuk that noize.

But there are plenty of forms of socialism that are the opposite of Stalinist, Maoist, State Capitalist regimes that wave the red flag around and sing solidarity songs while pocketing the labor value of the proletariats.

Quick way to figure this out, go to wikipedia's page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism and check out all the anti-statist and directly democratic forms.

One good example of a form of socialism that is working right now is the mutual aid between Argentinian worker-controlled factories and the cooperation between a hospital and the Zanon factory. Not only do the factories trade services and parts that they need with each other but one factory provides a hospital with tiles and the hospital gives out free healthcare, whatever they need, to the workers therein.

Cooperation and egalitarian wealth distribution are attainable but we must guard our societies against power as it is universally known to corrupt. As for welfare - it makes sense to take care of all children because they will become part of the work force. All children deserve the same healthcare and education - they deserve the best any society can give them! Furthermore seniors deserve healthcare, housing, and food because they were once part of the workforce. At any one time all the people that workers would have to support will still not cost them more than bosses and corporate profits have.

The only thing more humiliating than slavery is choosing your own master - if we understood what the bosses, corporations, and land owners are stealing from us we wouldn't be debating on who the bigger f^^khead is between the Dems and Reps. We'd be forming our own mutual aid societies and disintegrating the state.

There is a documentary called The Take. If you have ever wondered whether worker self management is really feasible, even in market economies, you should watch this movie. Search torrent sites like speckly.com and onebigtorrent.com
Very well stated and welcome to RIU! Your opinions are a welcomed respite. Here's some +rep for you.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Unless you have land where you practice sustainable homesteading and do not depend on petroleum and are commited to water conservation - you probably should not have a kid. Resources are finite and we are about to run head first into a brick wall. Peak Oil is one thing, but Peak Everything should be on our minds too.

Also, it doesn't make a lot of sense to make a child when there are already so many of them out there who need a loving family! As with pets like cats and dogs, we have so many human beings (for a number of reasons, not least of which is a cynical and apathetic approach by the US and other western countries when it comes to sex ed) that we should stop breeding whenever possible and adopt out the young ones that need a family already.

FUCK dog breeders. (/soapbox)
Holy cow, My faith in humanity is almost restored!

I wonder how much of a firestorm it would cause if all dogs and cats in the US had to get fixed. Because I really think that it needs to be done.
 

SDSativa

Active Member
Socialism takes the power away from the poeple and into the government. How can you support anything like that?
 

Anonymiss1969

Active Member
LOL.. i have to love the bush haters.. look for ANYTHING to use him as a scapegoat. What about your favorite family, The Kennedys. http://www.beyondweird.com/ufos/One_Who_Knows_Fire_From_The_Sky_Part_30.html

oh, and I DO love the Bush family.
Have you not ever heard George W Bush speak? He ranks among some of the stupidest people I know of. I don't understand how a fucking idoit made it to be president... twice!

I question any person's intelligence that actually loves the Bush family.
 
Top