Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, September 12, 2019

The Real News Network | Published on Sep 12, 2019

We had a conversation with Sen. Sanders' Press Secretary Briahna Joy Gray on the right-wing talking points used by mainstream media to discredit Sen. Sanders and the falsehoods about socialism perpetuated by the GOP.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Bernie Sanders Proposes New Economic Bill of Rights
truthout.org

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders delivered a full-throated defense of democratic socialism in his June 12 speech at George Washington University. Sanders quoted FDR's 1944 State of the Union address: "We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence."

Sanders, like FDR, proposed an Economic Bill of Rights, including the rights to health care, affordable housing, education, a living wage and retirement.

Sanders cited figures of vast wealth disparity in the United States, where "the top 1 percent of people own more wealth than the bottom 92 percent." He said there is higher income and wealth inequality today than at any time since the 1920s. And, Sanders stated, "despite an explosion in technology and worker productivity, the average wage of the American worker in real dollars is no higher than it was 46 years ago and millions of people are forced to work two or three jobs just to survive."

He also noted, "in America today, the very rich live on average 15 years longer than the poorest Americans."


Bernie and FDR, this is what America is all about.

#1 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-12 08:53 AM | Reply

Bernie is "fighting the demonization" by trying to sell a redefined socialism as capitalism with lots of social programs...and that's not socialism, no matter how many times he says it.

If Bernie needs to lie to sell socialism, then socialism isn't worth buying...and neither is Bernie. Sad, because he used to stick to his guns and now he's become just one name on a list of schmucks.

#2 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-09-12 09:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Yawn. Knew this was a Pinch thread from the title.

Sanders is free to call welfare-state capitalism "socialism" if he wants, and we are free to say that's bullschiit.

#3 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-12 09:19 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Sanders is free to call welfare-state capitalism "socialism" if he wants, and we are free to say that's bullschiit."

Yes, lying is legal and you can continue to do it as long as you want but we are free to laugh at you at the same time. And we do on a daily basis.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-12 09:27 AM | Reply

"The meaning of "socialism" has evolved; or, one might say, it is flying under a false flag. When Democratic politicians advocate socialism, they don't talk about North Korea, Soviet Russia, Albania, Cuba (anymore) or Venezuela (anymore). Rather, they talk about Sweden, Denmark and Norway"countries that are not, in fact, socialist. One might conclude that they just want a slightly larger welfare state"accompanied, although they never say this, by a less progressive tax system and often more business-friendly policies."

#5 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-12 09:35 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

--Yes, lying is legal

Yeah, white woman Rachel Dolezal called herself black. It wasn't illegal, but it didn't make her black any more than calling Nordic capitalist countries "socialist" make them socialist.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-12 09:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Bernie and FDR, this is what America is all about.

Internment camps?

#7 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-09-12 09:53 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Yeah, white woman Rachel Dolezal called herself black. It wasn't illegal, but it didn't make her black any more than calling Nordic capitalist countries "socialist" make them socialist."

When tax payers pay for healthcare instead of private insurance paying for it then it is Socialist whether you want to admit it or not. None of us ever claimed that those nations were entirely Socialist, but aspects of their Social Safety Net are Socialist. It's a good thing for the people to have economies that can be both Capitalist and Socialist at the same time. Things that people require just to be alive and healthy are better handled by Socialist programs, things like manufacturing and where competition exists are better left Capitalist. The idea that it has to be simplistically one way or the other is idiotic.

#8 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-12 09:55 AM | Reply

Bernie and FDR, this is what America is all about.

Eugenics?

#9 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-09-12 09:59 AM | Reply | Funny: 3


When tax payers pay for healthcare instead of private insurance paying for it then it is Socialist whether you want to admit it or not.

No its not..

Its when the doctors work for the state .... then its socialist ....

#10 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-09-12 10:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Future headline:

CNN: Bernie Sanders claims to be a black female. Says anyone who denies his/her identity is a racist and a sexist.

#11 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-12 10:02 AM | Reply

Socialism isn't a safety net.

Socialism is when the state owns the means of production.

Venezuela is a great example of Socialism.

#12 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-09-12 10:10 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

Trump campaign to counter Dems' debate by flying massive banner blasting socialism
abcnews.go.com

#13 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-09-12 10:26 AM | Reply

Socialism is when the state owns the means of production.
Venezuela is a great example of Socialism.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-09-12 10:10 AM | REPLY

finance.yahoo.com

It started with falling oil prices
Venezuela's problems stem from corruption and egregious mismanagement, which can happen anywhere. Countries with socialist regimes such as China, Vietnam, Chile and many in Europe have managed to successfully grow their economies as Venezuela's has tumbled.

The Maduro government oversaw the nationalized oil sector and took over a number of other businesses while redirecting resources from private companies to some of the country's poorest citizens. The redistribution plan led to major reductions in poverty under former President Hugo Chvez, who remains very popular in the country.

But it buckled under Maduro when oil prices dropped and he began seizing more industries. The declining price of oil from nearly $120 a barrel in 2014 to around $25 a barrel last year meant Maduro was forced to draw upon other sources of revenue to pay the increasing price of ever-growing national guard protection and to keep loyalist politicians in line. Oil sales are 50% of Venezuela's gross domestic product and 95% of its export revenue.

#14 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-09-12 10:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Countries with socialist regimes such as China, Vietnam, Chile and many in Europe

Stopped reading right there. Europe does not have a single "Socialist regime".

It's astonishing that so many people don't understand what Socialism is or have such an innate desire to redefine the word to mean something that it isn't.

Here is what Socialism is:

socialism noun
socialism | s-sh'-li-z'm
Definition of socialism
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

That is not indicative of any country in Europe or Scandinavia. That definition applies to Venezuela.

#15 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-09-12 10:41 AM | Reply

When tax payers pay for healthcare instead of private insurance paying for it then it is Socialist whether you want to admit it or not.

No, it isn't. Listen to Jeff - he's being very patient and he's using small words to help you understand it. Socialism is an economic system.

It's a good thing for the people to have economies that can be both Capitalist and Socialist at the same time.

They can't. They are mutually exclusive. If you are referring to economic systems wherein the state owns some of the key industries and exerts strict controls on the capitalist portion of the economy, you are talking about fascism (euphemistically referred to as state-controlled capitalism today).

#16 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-09-12 11:02 AM | Reply

#5 | Posted by nullifidian

I agree the meaning in today's discourse has "evolved". Not because of Democrats and Liberals but because of Republicans and Conservatives. The right started demonizing social programs in the 1980s (in particular "welfare" programs) and in recent years have been labeling everything benefiting society or rather in particular poorer segments of society as "socialism" which it really isn't by definition. But hey Corporate and wealthy welfare is just fine by them... And I agree by definition socialism isn't what the left is talking about at all but they have taken the challenge of "redefining" what socialism means because of right wing rhetoric. What is being talked about is what I would call Socially Responsible Capitalism - does that help you and your problem with the definition?

#17 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-09-12 12:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

--What is being talked about is what I would call Socially Responsible Capitalism

I have said for some time they should have branded it "Compassionate Capitalism," rather than "Democratic Socialism." But they didn't take my advice, and now have a problem on their hands. Words have consequences.

#18 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-12 12:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The rich want our tax dollars to do with as they please. They can't gave it going back to us.

Therefore, the corporate owned media is misrepresenting Bernie and Democratic socialism.

2020 is turning into 2016 in an awful hurry.

#19 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-09-12 12:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I posted this link in another thread, but it is a must read for anyone wanting to understand Bernie's definition of democratic socialism:

Bernie Sanders defines his vision for democratic socialism in the United States

Sanders gave a speech on this in 2015. Now he's back, calling for a new era of New Deal politics.

www.vox.com

#20 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-09-12 12:44 PM | Reply

#18 | Posted by nullifidian

They didn't brand it though. Republicans did. Bottom line is yes they should have tried to rebrand.

#21 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-09-12 01:09 PM | Reply

How much is the democratic party helping Bernie with this issue?

Bernie is trying to clarify, qualify, stop the demonization of the term "socialism".

Fair enough and it's important that if folks are trash or promote something, they should know what in the hell they're talking about.

But the article is all about how hard Bernie is working on this......what about his friends in the democratic party??

Does he have any?

#22 | Posted by eberly at 2019-09-12 01:42 PM | Reply

what about his friends in the democratic party??

They're the ones who are demonizing socialism in the media.

Does he have any?
#22 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Nope.

#23 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-09-12 01:52 PM | Reply

"The meaning of "socialism" has evolved; or, one might say, it is flying under a false flag. When Democratic politicians advocate socialism, they don't talk about North Korea, Soviet Russia, Albania, Cuba (anymore) or Venezuela (anymore). Rather, they talk about Sweden, Denmark and Norway"countries that are not, in fact, socialist. One might conclude that they just want a slightly larger welfare state"accompanied, although they never say this, by a less progressive tax system and often more business-friendly policies."

Exactly.

If these countries weren't capitalist to start with, they wouldn't be able to provide a penny's worth of free ----.

It also goes back to something I've been railing on, which is the Value Added Tax. Sweden has a 25% value added tax. Which is a large part of why that country is able to do what they do. I just have to wonder if American progressives would be equally willing to pay 25% more for goods and services in order to enable a Swedish-style outcome...

Danni?

Laura?

Clown?

...anyone?

#24 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-12 03:43 PM | Reply

"Venezuela's problems stem from corruption and egregious mismanagement, which can happen anywhere."

Venezuela is a perfect example of what socialism looks like when it lacks capitalist backing.

#25 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-12 03:45 PM | Reply

"The rich want our tax dollars to do with as they please. They can't gave it going back to us."

How much have the rich taken from you? Did they break into your house and steal it from your cookie jar? Rob your bank?

I feel like I just need to you to explain to me how the rich have done you wrong.

#26 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-12 03:49 PM | Reply

"Bernie is trying to clarify, qualify, stop the demonization of the term "socialism".

Socialism is a term that might just be slightly more palatable that fascism. And rightly so. Socialist are responsible for more death and misery than pretty much any other demographic in history. Not many organizations can challenge the collective body count of Union of Soviet Socialists and the National Socialists.

#27 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-12 03:54 PM | Reply

"The meaning of "socialism" has evolved; or, one might say, it is flying under a false flag. When Democratic politicians advocate socialism, they don't talk about North Korea, Soviet Russia, Albania, Cuba (anymore) or Venezuela (anymore). Rather, they talk about Sweden, Denmark and Norway"countries that are not, in fact, socialist. One might conclude that they just want a slightly larger welfare state"accompanied, although they never say this, by a less progressive tax system and often more business-friendly policies."

Let's see if another user's words can help you understand.

Trumper: Soshallizzum don't werk!

Sane person: What about all the Scandinavian countries with high standards of living? Their citizens are among the happiest on Earth.

Trumper: Them ain't soshallist! Them's capitullist!

Sane person: OK. Then let's adopt some similar public policies in the U.S.

Trumper: No! That's soshallist!

POSTED BY ANTON AT 2019-09-12 02:48 PM

#28 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-09-12 03:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#28

If you're in favor of what the Scandinavian countries are doing, you're in favor of capitalism.

BTW...how do you feel about a 25% Value Added Tax? Like Sweden?

You're not European without a VAT!!!!

#29 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-12 04:02 PM | Reply

"BTW...how do you feel about a 25% Value Added Tax? Like Sweden?"

A tariff of 25% is due to take effect next month unless Trump postpones it again. Pretty much the same thing.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-12 04:21 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

a tariff and a VAT are pretty much the same thing?

#31 | Posted by eberly at 2019-09-12 04:24 PM | Reply

Not exactly the same but both add to the cost of goods.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-12 04:29 PM | Reply

#32

Let's start with "not at all the same" and we will use really simple words and concepts to explain it to you.

Wow.

#33 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-09-12 05:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

how do you feel about a 25% Value Added Tax?

Let's do it.

How do you feel about repealing tax cuts the rich have given themselves? (Through lobbying congress, the president, or in Trump's case, giving himself a tax break)

#34 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-09-12 06:15 PM | Reply

Socialism is a term that might just be slightly more palatable that fascism. And rightly so. Socialist are responsible for more death and misery than pretty much any other demographic in history. Not many organizations can challenge the collective body count of Union of Soviet Socialists and the National Socialists.

Posted by madbomber

Another dude using right wing memes about government systems that were authoritarian and fascist pretending that just because the word 'socialist' was in their names they were socialist.

NAZIs were fascist. Soviets were authoritarian/communist, not socialist. NAZIs and their ally Mussolini executed socialists.

Continue to conflate them with 'democratic socialism' like most of Europe and we'll continue to laugh.

#35 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-12 07:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

--Soviets were authoritarian/communist, not socialist.

Distinction without a difference. The Soviets practiced "scientific socialism," i.e., Marxist socialism.

#36 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-12 07:57 PM | Reply

Distinction without a difference. The Soviets practiced "scientific socialism," i.e., Marxist socialism.

#36 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

That's ridiculous.

#37 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-12 08:05 PM | Reply

That's ridiculous.
#37 | POSTED BY PINCHALOAF

No it's not, it's known as top down socialism

#38 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-09-12 08:15 PM | Reply

NAZIs and their ally Mussolini executed socialists. - au

They executed, bottom up socialists.

#39 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-09-12 08:16 PM | Reply

No it's not, it's known as top down socialism

#38 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Where, on the Planet of the Apes?

Ridiculous

#40 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-12 08:21 PM | Reply

Wikipedia....
en.wikipedia.org See Socialist planned economy...

See when you are flippant, you ruin your ability to convert people to Bernie; it goes out the window because of your ignorance.

#41 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-09-12 09:09 PM | Reply

"How do you feel about repealing tax cuts the rich have given themselves? (Through lobbying congress, the president, or in Trump's case, giving himself a tax break)"

I'll do you one better. Let's repeal all the tax cuts.

"NAZIs were fascist. Soviets were authoritarian/communist, not socialist. NAZIs and their ally Mussolini executed socialists."

Nazi's were national Socialists...it's literally in the name.

And Mussolini was a socialist. He broke from the movement when they declared that war was a bourgeoisie affair, and the socialists wouldn't participate. Mussolini beelived that socialism could be implimented at the national, rather than international level, and created the fascist party as a means of enabling that dream. And before Hitler became a fascist, he served as an officer in the short-lived Bavarian Soviet Republic.

The reason the Nazis and Communists hated each other wasn't that they were so different-both represented socialist interests-but rather because they were so alike. They were competing for the same hearts and minds.

#42 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 06:01 AM | Reply

"Continue to conflate them with 'democratic socialism' like most of Europe and we'll continue to laugh."

Democratic Socialism is a bit of a misnomer. A better name would be democratic capitalism, as it is capitalism and capitalism alone that makes any socialist-ish efforts possible.

Without capitalism to back it up, socialism fails. Fact.

#43 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 06:04 AM | Reply

And Mussolini was a socialist.

#42 | POSTED BYMADBOMBER

If El Duce was a socialist, then why were fascist Blackshirts loyal to Mussolini?

#44 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-13 06:51 AM | Reply

" A better name would be democratic capitalism, as it is capitalism and capitalism alone that makes any socialist-ish efforts possible."

Not true at all. Capitalism is bankers making money off of money. Labor is the source of wealth. Without labor capitalists would be homeless vagabonds.
Which industries would be successful today if we had not built railroads, highways, electric grids, airports, schools, etc. Capitalists just benefit from the socialist efforts of the nation by raking the profits off the top but they don't create any of those profits.

#45 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-13 09:32 AM | Reply

Mussolini was born a socialist. His father was a socialist, who gave him the first "Benito" to honor Mexican president Benito Juarez. His middle names were given to honor prominent Italian socialists. He remained a socialist until his late 30s, when he sided with socialists who supported Italian intervention in WWI. In fact he justified the intervention using traditional socialist language.

#46 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 09:57 AM | Reply

"Not true at all. Capitalism is bankers making money off of money. Labor is the source of wealth. Without labor capitalists would be homeless vagabonds."

If that were true, Venezuela would not have become the dumpster fire it is today.

Furthermore, the capitalist is almost always a fully qualified and capable laborer as well. Labor is not always a fully functional capitalist.

"Capitalists just benefit from the socialist efforts of the nation by raking the profits off the top but they don't create any of those profits."

This is another of those times when you show your ass...by trying to discuss economics withhout ever having taken an economics course.

#47 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 10:00 AM | Reply

"The best-known advocates of the labor theory were Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and Karl Marx. The labor theory of value suggested that two commodities will trade for the same price if they embody the same amount of labor-time, or else they will exchange at a ratio fixed by the relative differences in the two labor-times."

www.google.com

Before the first capitalist invested his first dime people created value with labor.

#48 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-13 10:25 AM | Reply

"Furthermore, the capitalist is almost always a fully qualified and capable laborer as well. Labor is not always a fully functional capitalist."

Horse crap. Most capitalists work on Wall St. and have no ability to do labor at all. They make money with money based on the labor of others. A capitalist is the guy who decides to shut down a factory and move it to China leaving the people who earned him his wealth to rot in the cold. Mitt Romney was a capitalist, Bain Capital was a perfect example of capitalism. Not a pretty story.

#49 | Posted by danni at 2019-09-13 10:29 AM | Reply

#48

You're still showing your ass. The Labor Theory of Value (LTV) is to economics what the flat earth theory is to geography. It's no longer considered a valid theory because it ties the value of a product explicitly to the labor required (socially necessary labor is how Marx put it). Even when Marx wrote Kapital, there were huge problems with this theory. The biggest was that it only applied to goods that traded as commodities. It didn't work when applied to differentiated products, and it certainly didn't work when applied to services. Even with regards to commodities, it didn't work. Labor is one of the three factors of production that produce wealth, the others being capital and land. There is nothing inherently special about labor, and you could just as easily construct a land theory of value, or a capital theory of value. Or you could simply ascribe value based on some other unknown characterist. How much energy it reflects back into space...it really doesn't matter from an economic POV.

#50 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 12:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Horse crap. Most capitalists work on Wall St. and have no ability to do labor at all."

Really?

You think flipping burgers is beyond the skill level of your average capitalist?

"A capitalist is the guy who decides to shut down a factory and move it to China leaving the people who earned him his wealth to rot in the cold."

Who are the people who "earned him his wealth?" The workers? Were they paid for the labor that allowed him to earn wealth? You seem to be presupposing that this "capitalist" had a duty to someone else to ensure their gainful employment. Is that what you're saying?

If so, shouldn't employees be equally expected to forego more lucrative options out of a responsibility to stay with a current employer who paid them less than they could be earning?

#51 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 12:20 PM | Reply

"There is no necessary and direct connection between the value of a good and whether, or in what quantities, labor and other goods of higher order were applied to its production. A non-economic good (a quantity of timber in a virgin forest, for example) does not attain value for men since large quantities of labor or other economic goods were not applied to its production. Whether a diamond was found accidentally or was obtained from a diamond pit with the employment of a thousand days of labor is completely irrelevant for its value. In general, no one in practical life asks for the history of the origin of a good in estimating its value, but considers solely the services that the good will render him and which he would have to forgo if he did not have it at his command...The quantities of labor or of other means of production applied to its production cannot, therefore, be the determining factor in the value of a good. Comparison of the value of a good with the value of the means of production employed in its production does, of course, show whether and to what extent its production, an act of past human activity, was appropriate or economic. But the quantities of goods employed in the production of a good have neither a necessary nor a directly determining influence on its value."

-Carl Menger

#52 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-13 03:39 PM | Reply

"In general, no one in practical life asks for the history of the origin of a good in estimating its value, but considers solely the services that the good will render him and which he would have to forgo if he did not have it at his command."

I guess the billions spent in arts and antiquities isn't being done by people living a practical life, then.
But actually, it's because their practical life involves practical methods of wealth preservation and diversification...

"The U.S. remains the world's largest art market, valued at $26.6 billion and accounting for 42 percent of the global total in 2017. The European art and antiquities market, a close second, accounts for nearly $23 billion annually."

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-09-13 03:53 PM | Reply

@ Madbomber

Here's what you do ...

Since you live in Europe, tell all the locals that Mussolini was a socialist because "he was born a socialist".

They'll laff your doofus American ass right off the continent -- no offense.

#54 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-09-13 03:53 PM | Reply

"Whether a diamond was found accidentally or was obtained from a diamond pit with the employment of a thousand days of labor is completely irrelevant for its value."

Okay, but nobody would be trying to obtain them from a diamond pit with the employment of a thousand days of labor if they weren't worth more than all that costs...

#55 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-09-13 03:54 PM | Reply

Bernie, it would be easier to just abandon socialism, not to mention more politically rewarding.

#56 | Posted by goatman at 2019-09-13 06:20 PM | Reply

And Mussolini was a socialist.

#42 | POSTED BYMADBOMBER

It never ceases to amaze me how uninformed some people are.

Mussolini executed socialists. He was only a socialist for a short time in his youth before turning against them and becoming a full fledged fascist who executed socialists.

I've posted this to the same guy before, but he refuses to listen and repeats the same BS in spite of that.

In 1912 he became editor of Avanti! (Forward!), the official daily newspaper of Italy's Socialist Party. But he was expelled from the party two years later over his support for World War I. By 1919 a radically changed Mussolini had founded the fascist movement, which would later become the Fascist Party.

www.history.com

#57 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-13 10:34 PM | Reply

"They'll laff your doofus American ass right off the continent -- no offense."

I think I would get more laughs by calling them "Democratic Socialists."

Hopefully for me it would be limited to just laughs.

#58 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-14 04:01 AM | Reply

"Mussolini executed socialists."

And Stalin executed communists. Is there a point here?

"He was only a socialist for a short time in his youth before turning against them and becoming a full fledged fascist who executed socialists."

He was a socialist for nearly 2/3rds of his life.

And I think you're missing the larger point. Yes, Mussloni was expelled from the Socialist party...but he was expelled over remarks he made about the party...not because he had reversed course and embraced free market capitalism. In fact his criticisms of the party was that they had failed as socialists.

#59 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-14 04:04 AM | Reply

And Stalin executed communists. Is there a point here?

MADBOMBER

Stalin was a communist, not a socialist.

He was a socialist for nearly 2/3rds of his life.

No, he wasn't. He was kicked out of the socialists in his 20's. He lived to be 62. That's some interesting, uh, 'alternate' math you use there.

Again, you don't know your history. And your feeble attempts to label Mussolini a socialist as a weak attempt to label Democrats to be akin to Mussolini is completely at odds with facts.

Western Europe is where you'll find examples of Democratic Socialism.

Trying to invent you own facts makes you look obstinate and willfully ignorant.

#60 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-14 04:31 AM | Reply

"Stalin was a communist, not a socialist."

Uh...communists ARE socialists.

"No, he wasn't. He was kicked out of the socialists in his 20's. He lived to be 62."

No. He was at least 31. He was still a member of the Italian Socialist Party when WWI broke out.

"Again, you don't know your history"

Do you want me to provide references? If you have any sources that contradict anything I've posted, send them. But I'm only posting information that is already easily accessible by anyone with a computer.

#61 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-14 07:15 AM | Reply

"Western Europe is where you'll find examples of Democratic Socialism."

I live in Western Europe. All I see is capitalism.

"Trying to invent you own facts makes you look obstinate and willfully ignorant."

Please show me where I've posted something that is not true.

#62 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-09-14 07:16 AM | Reply

--Stalin was a communist, not a socialist.

Distinction without a difference. Stalin practiced "scientific socialism," i.e. Marxist socialism, the only important socialism since 1917, one that governed the lives of several billion people in the 20th century.

#63 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-09-14 08:48 AM | Reply

I live in Western Europe. All I see is capitalism.

While you're in Germany, learn something.

Germany has a universal multi-payer health care system, pensions for everyone, free tuition at every state college and university, numerous social safety nets. What Sanders refers to as 'democratic socialism.' Like other countries in Western Europe.

You're dishonestly continuing to conflate that with NAZIs, communists, and fascists. Democratic socialism has nothing to do with state control of industry or housing.

#64 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-14 04:07 PM | Reply

You too, NULLIFIDIAN

#65 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-09-14 04:08 PM | Reply

"I live in Western Europe. All I see is capitalism."

No windmills?

#66 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-09-14 04:27 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort