As socialist dream crumbles, Venezuelans find Nicolas Maduro 'a bad copy' of Chavez

I believe they merely need to socialize the cost of the largest combine harvesters in the World.

 

The excuses for socialist failures never ends. It's always somebody else's fault. Well, guess what? It will always turn out wrong because it DOESN'T work!! Never has, never will.

 

1929 happened and some capitalists were claiming things were fine, within a week of the market crash.

 

As do I. Its a tragedy filled with irony-they think that they can go against human nature-and yet their own selfishness and ignorance led them to believe they can take from some and give to others-and it will turn out ok.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs is the definition of slavery-but then again, some of us weren't meant to be free.

Its the human condition, what can you do?

- - - Updated - - -

The entire last century happened and the official line was that socialism was doing fine as hundreds of millions were murdered.

Commies float here on tires, the walls they built-were to keep people in-what do you think that means?

 

It wasn't socialism, but political strife. How many people died during our Civil War?

 

Right. Its never the system, its just the bad stupid people who try to manage it. They make stupid decisions. Otherwise, it would be paradise, I tell you, PARADISE.

Seems that same argument has held after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Mao's millions of murders in the Great Leap Forward, the millions dead in Cambodia, etc., etc. etc. etc. etc., etc. etc., etc., ........................................................

http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/mao-and-great-leap-forward

I know, I know. It was all a CIA plot. Actually all those dead people would have died anyway, and Mao's actions actually saved millions more. Mao was actually a secret capitalist. Mao didn't do it right. All those dead people were rich land holders and deserved it for resisting the imposition of Communist paradise.

Do I have all the excuses down now?

 

With socialism comes political strife.

 

Strife is a Human Condition without a more perfect Union.

Socialism starts with a social contract such as our Constitution.

 

If Americans had not allowed British/Roman Empire to hijack American capitalism at the civil war converting it into support for the military industrial complex, people would not think that.

In order to return America to constitutional capitalism, you and EVERYONE reading need to work for our lawful and peaceful revolution.

Constitutional capitalism is essentially spiritual capitalism because it supports life, an unalienable right protected by the constitution.

The strategy on the page of the link is completely out of the box, but more completely legal than any plan you can find. It is NOT politics, it is law.

Using it makes State citizens the ultimate law enforcement of the nation.

 

Socialism ends with worse political strife, and hundreds of millions killed.

 

Socialism by its sociopolitical nature and structure is ony a step or two away from communism. The people have to have very strong and functional belief systems with inherent UNITY to stop any communistic consolidation of power before it gains military power. Then socialism is okay.

Sweden is a good example. There are other peaceful nations that meet the criteria also.

 

Except that your narrative doesn't fit what actually happened. Russia lost standing in the world due to socialism. There were no players on the world scale save for maybe the UK in 1917 because there was no way to project power.

The notion of the distribution of wealth being somehow equitable in the Soviet Union is laughable to say the least. Instead of being slaves to landowners, the people were owned by the state. One dictatorship as traded for another, and the first man made famine in history happened soon after socialism took hold.

Secondly, the major Russian industries are still state owned. Meanwhile, Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuana, etc have left the silliness of socialism behind, and the citizens of all of them enjoy a greater quality of life than those of Russia. The problems all occurred in nations that were slow to leave socialism behind.

 

Sweden is not a good example-why is it people always are so eager to cite the nordic countries?

They are small, ethnically homogenous locations that rely on protection from more powerful nations.

In other words, almost nothing like the US.

Its also interesting to me that the same socialists who are so obsessed with race in the US, can only cite exceedingly white nations as a model to aspire for.

 

To further the point you're making, free market capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and done more to improve lives that socialism or anything else. Even ignoring the butchery committed by socialist states, millions still died of government caused famines. How often in the 20th century did that happen here???

 

Add to that, most Nordic countries are resource rich. With a small population, that sort of thing really works in your favor.

 

I've been a Ron Paul supporter since the 2008 election.

 

Even Marx recognized that it was necessary for a market system to create wealth before it could be re-distributed. Realistic socialists recognize that wealth will not be created in a socialist system (human nature doesn't work to maximize effort and wealth so others may benefit), it can only be redistributed. Socialism is subject to a sort self liquidation as a system as assets are consumed in greater quantities over time than they are created..

 

We have the best form of socialism in the World. Even the right wing complains our poor are not really poor enough by Third World standards.

Capitalism died 1929; 1984 is still just right wing, Orwellian fantasy.

 

Agreed.

 

the US is resource rich and has a diverse population. and, we still have the best form of Socialism, in the entire World.