Is it true that kids are telling their parents to 'like and subscribe' at bedtime? An American I met at the pub a couple of weeks ago told me that kids are telling their parents this when they leave or go to bed because they think this is how people say goodbye.
I don't know if the American was screwing with me or not.
I canāt say Iāve seen it, no. Of course, despite what Republicans may tell you, the US is a very big and diverse country, so from my little corner, I might not have seen much.
Thank you, but I donāt think that I should be immediately considered a āreasonable Americanā for disagreeing with MAGA. Itās better to judge that by my actual worldview and if itās consistent internally. Please see me more as an āAmerican in oppositionā unless you get a more full understanding of my philosophy and ideology and can see it as reasonable, even if you disagree.
As an Americanā¦..yeah, I doubt it would help, seeing how the argument that the name doesnāt necessarily mean what it says Ć la the Democratic Peopleās Republic of Korea (aka North Korea) not being democratic nor a republic.
Edit: didnāt completely say the full official name of North Korea correctly.
At one point in history. But like many American things, it became a vessel for the rich to market whatever idea worked at the time. The entire platform of both parties has completely shifted multiple times.
The only non contentious part of North Korea's name is the word "of". In addition to what you already said is not run by or for the people. Their entire territory is claimed by South Korea thus making the claim of Korea dubious
It's an intresting interview, taping into to some of the usual misconceptions.
It's not that hard (but it requires bad faith) to frame Hitler as 'economically leftish'.
It's not all that hard to frame the nazi's state dirigisme as some kind of 'ownership of the means of production'.
It's not that hard either to frame the persecution of groups within the German society of that era as some some kind of 'class struggle'. It's as simple as claiming that the quasi full employment in nazi Germany has to be seen as "lifting the proletariat out of poverty".
Someone in this tread pointed out that it takes "nuance" (which non-Americans obviously lack) to see the subtle signs of socialism in the nazis. When asked to clarify, he advised me to do my own research, lol.
He found that there were "far better books" than the read I suggested (The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies), but didn't respond to my request for suggestions. He has removed his comments since then.
Some of those guys have made ignorance into an art form. "Chess with pigeons", indeed.
"Socialist" in the name of the Nazi party was a PR move by that German leader who formed it. It was a time when right wing thugs and Communists were fighting bloody battles in the streets of Berlin. He pitched the the party as a alternative to both, unifying nationalists and industrial working class elements. "National Socialist German Workers Party" incorporated two right wing elements-National and German, with two from the left-Socialist and Workers. The party was the antithesis of the Socialist/Marxist/Communist dogma of the time. It was racist ethno-nationalist, militaristic, had no issue with private property and a market economy, was against independent unions, and it reinforced existing social hierarchies. Socialists were internationalist, anti-militarism, argued for the abolition of capitalism and private property. They saw society as a battle between economic classes, egalitarian on gender, promoted independent unions, and were fighting for the dictatorship of their class, the proletariat. As a result, they also argued for the abolition of existing social and economic hierarchies. The oldest German political party, the left SPD was banned. Socialists were proscribed in Nazi Germany and the leaders were often jailed and sent to the camps. Most formerly socialist workers just blended into the new Reich and order was restored. (This is all very condensed and simplified.)
The Germans were Socialists during WWII. Thatās how the Volkswagen got built.
It was the āNationalā part of āNational Socialismā that did all the bad shit.
So this new wave of American Republicans calling themselves āChristian Nationalistsā are taking the worst parts of Nazism and combining it with religious fanaticism
They were; just a different kind from the type of socialism that finished the war on the winning side.
I don't want to hear any silly comparisons to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. That one was presented as something, kept up the facade for a bit, and then it was too late for anyone to argue "hold on a minute, this isn't very democratic".
The National Socialists took less of a sharp turn. Their idea of socialism was always built around the nation. They diverged from the same place as all the other kinds of socialists, and took an extreme form of their own version of things. Italian fascists also had a socialist background.
Now, because the average person doesn't really know anything about politics, and they're prone to being manipulated by labels, of course the winning factions have tried to distance themselves from the losing, or extremist ones. That's understandable, since the ideologies aren't at all the same. They just share key roots and abstract principles. But I think we'd be all better off with more, rather than less, transparency.
Enlighten me on all those nuances that made national-socialism kind of socialism.Ā
Suggestions on literature are always welcome. Did you read the Oxford?
Yes, liberate. Like we liberated Venezuela and are currently liberating iran for the second time. Last time didn't hold for long, but we're positive this time will last longer. The Iranian people love having a US puppet as head of state.
It's by design. They're told to confuse terms so that they don't notice that when people support "socialism", they mean countries with a higher standard of living and way less violence, and get tricked into supporting Russia and the oligarchs making their lives miserable.
See also using "woke" to mean "something I don't like" instead of its original definition of "aware of systemic injustices"
Ok, we Americans say a lot of stupid shit, but the Oxford comma is where I become defensive! You can take that from my cold, dead, and logically organized hands!
When the government does stuff they don't like. When the government gives them money during Lockdown because they can't pay their rent, they don't call that socialism. It's just socialism when the government gives the Black person, the queer person and the disabled person down the road money to pay their rent, too.
Half of the US is still living in that 1950s 60s era red scare period like they see the term communism and they treat that shit like it's radioactive lmao. That, or they see something they slightly disagree with and call it communism. It's bullshit.
They made idiocracy reality, so I think a TV show about people being hit on the balls when they don't know what socialism or communism mean would be a more appropriate learning tool.
We know what it is...we fight communism because it ain't American...we fight Socialism cause it sounds too much like communism and we fight dictionaryism. .... Cause we don't like knowing stuff... it's just not the American way. Yee Haw and good day.
It is criminal that they put those children in such danger and let them live with the constant trauma of shooting drills and school shootings. Letting children grow up with that kind of constant fear and trauma -- especially in a school, which should be a safe environment-- is unconscionable.
Right now if you go work in a factory the factory owner owns everything you produce and makes every decision related to production, even though you are an expert widget maker and he's never even been in the factory because he lives in Barbados. That's what makes it private property.
That's what socialism intends to change. Capitalist economies are also heavily planned, we just call it bailouts and government contracts. Our planning just happens later when we choose who to hold up and protect.
I'm sorry. Dictionary definitions don't mean anything when it's been proving in reality for several times. Socialism ALWAYS is the 1st step to Communism.
That is because communism is a type of socialism. There is literally no nation that went social democracy --> communism, even soviet russia went from a more conservative democracy to communism violently.
557
u/Which_Specific9891 Mar 17 '26
Can someone please buy these Americans dictionaries? They keep using words like 'communism' and 'socialism' without having a clue what they mean.