Should prostitution be made legal? Watch

This discussion is closed.
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#201
Report 14 years ago
#201
(Original post by Eternal Idol)
The economy doesn't imply the government, Hitler and Mussolini had a really regular AMERICAN LIKE capitalist economy ...
for a start this is the other way round, capitalism does not equal democracy, although it is more likely than totalitarianism (although you are not totalitarian if the economy is not planned). A planned economy though does equal totalitarianism, how else can it work.

um, no they did not, this was discussed on some other thread, but i cant remember which 1, they favoured an integration of state and private business. In fact it was remarkably similar to early aspecxts of communism.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#202
Report 14 years ago
#202
(Original post by JSM)
for a start this is the other way round, capitalism does not equal democracy, although it is more likely than totalitarianism (although you are not totalitarian if the economy is not planned). A planned economy though does equal totalitarianism, how else can it work.

um, no they did not, this was discussed on some other thread, but i cant remember which 1, they favoured an integration of state and private business. In fact it was remarkably similar to early aspecxts of communism.
Hitler hated communists and got all of them out of his way before he even thought of the Jewish
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#203
Report 14 years ago
#203
(Original post by ben2111)
YOU DID NOT GET MY POINT

Socialism is a philosophy! Socialists were the thinkers that followed marx and other inentors of the idea. the planned economy was what happened in russia and I think I mentioned it already it is called COMMUNISM and not even that term is correct

anarchy is also a philosophy!
socialists did not follow marx, collectivists tend to do so, and socialism in one branch of collectivism. How can you have a socialist state without planning, who decides who gets what above what level, the universla rule of planning.


hmmm
0
EI_123
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#204
Report 14 years ago
#204
(Original post by JSM)
for a start this is the other way round, capitalism does not equal democracy, although it is more likely than totalitarianism (although you are not totalitarian if the economy is not planned). A planned economy though does equal totalitarianism, how else can it work.

um, no they did not, this was discussed on some other thread, but i cant remember which 1, they favoured an integration of state and private business. In fact it was remarkably similar to early aspecxts of communism.
Ben have already answered, Rosa Luxemburgo is a name to take in count. In the beggining on the 20th century there were more communist in Germany than everywhere else.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#205
Report 14 years ago
#205
(Original post by JSM)
anarchy is also a philosophy!
socialists did not follow marx, collectivists tend to do so, and socialism in one branch of collectivism. How can you have a socialist state without planning, who decides who gets what above what level, the universla rule of planning.


hmmm
Marx did not wirte about a COMMUNIST (how many times now?) state but more about distribution of some of the value of a company to the workers, for example. ANd democracy within capitalistic structures (Germany was very capitalistic when Marx wrote his books and the workers had no rights whatsoever, from this position some of his statements are understandable)
Please do not equal Marx or socialism with the fail of communist societies/economies
0
EI_123
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#206
Report 14 years ago
#206
(Original post by JSM)
anarchy is also a philosophy!
socialists did not follow marx, collectivists tend to do so, and socialism in one branch of collectivism. How can you have a socialist state without planning, who decides who gets what above what level, the universla rule of planning.


hmmm
Bakunin :cool: that would be nice.
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#207
Report 14 years ago
#207
(Original post by ben2111)
You better pay attention next time

first do you think the apartheid regime was right? If you answer yes I will bever talk to you again but go right ahead

second mandela was the leader of the PEACEFUL resistance, he spent 27 years in jail and still preached his followers not to use any violence. I do not know if you or I would have this mental strength

but not to get you all insecure YES, mandela participated in ONE action which was destroying an electricity cable.
i dont know if the aparteid regime was right although i do not believe in eugenics.

mandela converted to peaceful action after his violence failed, he was actually in some neighbouring country blowign things up and and also blew up bridges etc. within SA

MEntal strength - not really, pragmatism, MLK used it, so did ghandi, so did the bus boycotts in the 1960s. It is not htat hard, in fact you do it to your teachers, you dont turn around and hit them.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#208
Report 14 years ago
#208
(Original post by JSM)
anarchy is also a philosophy!
socialists did not follow marx, collectivists tend to do so, and socialism in one branch of collectivism. How can you have a socialist state without planning, who decides who gets what above what level, the universla rule of planning.


hmmm
Off topic, anarchy was never anybodys intention.

collectivism is a term that certainly was invented after socialism
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#209
Report 14 years ago
#209
(Original post by ben2111)
if you want to get first han info JSM read "A lang walk to freedom" by mandela or simply a book about modern south african history. Did you know even 90% of the white south africans adore mandela? At least as a person, even though their loves have not improved by abolishing apartheid
mass socialisation
0
zizero
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#210
Report 14 years ago
#210
(Original post by Eternal Idol)
The economy doesn't imply the government, Hitler and Mussolini had a really regular AMERICAN LIKE capitalist economy ...
That's not true.

Mussolini tried to establish a corporatist (syndicalist) state. He partly succeeded. His aspirations were clearly not capitalist.
He often intervened into the economy and he was anti-free-trade, as he thought Italy should become self-sufficient. That's hardly american-style capitalism.

Hitler also used massive state-intervention into the economy. He used Keynsian methods to create economic growth. He was much more radical in that than Roosevelt. His economic policy could well be described as socialist. That's harldy capitalist.

After all, Hitler was a national SOCIALIST !
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#211
Report 14 years ago
#211
(Original post by ben2111)
Hitler hated communists and got all of them out of his way before he even thought of the Jewish
and, did you read what i said, it doesnt matter, a controlled economy has to equal totalitariansim, whereas a free economy there is a choice, as with all things.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#212
Report 14 years ago
#212
(Original post by JSM)
i dont know if the aparteid regime was right although i do not believe in eugenics.

mandela converted to peaceful action after his violence failed, he was actually in some neighbouring country blowign things up and and also blew up bridges etc. within SA

MEntal strength - not really, pragmatism, MLK used it, so did ghandi, so did the bus boycotts in the 1960s. It is not htat hard, in fact you do it to your teachers, you dont turn around and hit them.
With the bridges you are wrong. Mandela was never active in neighbouring countries demolishing anything as far as I am concerned. and a bit more respect wouldnt be bad either. His achievements are incredible. Please do me the favour and never embarass yourself with such statements when there is anybody from South Africa around, they will slaughter you straight away.
0
EI_123
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#213
Report 14 years ago
#213
(Original post by zizero)
That's not true.

Mussolini tried to establish a corporatist (syndicalist) state. He partly succeeded. His aspirations were clearly not capitalist.
He often intervened into the economy and he was anti-free-trade, as he thought Italy should become self-sufficient. That's hardly american-style capitalism.

Hitler also used massive state-intervention into the economy. He used Keynsian methods to create economic growth. He was much more radical in that than Roosevelt. His economic policy could well be described as socialist. That's harldy capitalist.

After all, Hitler was a national SOCIALIST !
You have already mentioned my point by bringing up Roosevelt.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#214
Report 14 years ago
#214
(Original post by zizero)
That's not true.

Mussolini tried to establish a corporatist (syndicalist) state. He partly succeeded. His aspirations were clearly not capitalist.
He often intervened into the economy and he was anti-free-trade, as he thought Italy should become self-sufficient. That's hardly american-style capitalism.

Hitler also used massive state-intervention into the economy. He used Keynsian methods to create economic growth. He was much more radical in that than Roosevelt. His economic policy could well be described as socialist. That's harldy capitalist.

After all, Hitler was a national SOCIALIST !
Yes but socialist had a completely different meaning, it is a bit of a wrong translation cause in German it rather means social, not socialist. Everybody called themselves social at that time.
And you contradicted yourself, Keynsian methods are not exactly communism, are they?
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#215
Report 14 years ago
#215
Where is vienna? :mad:
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#216
Report 14 years ago
#216
(Original post by ben2111)
Marx did not wirte about a COMMUNIST (how many times now?) state but more about distribution of some of the value of a company to the workers, for example. ANd democracy within capitalistic structures (Germany was very capitalistic when Marx wrote his books and the workers had no rights whatsoever, from this position some of his statements are understandable)
Please do not equal Marx or socialism with the fail of communist societies/economies
no marx did not write about communism, but not all socialists follow marx either. Have you actually read das kapital (i mean the original is in german-so should be easy). Give me an example of a successful socialist state then, if they dont fail, and communism and socialism are both a species of collectivism. So they are in fact related.
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#217
Report 14 years ago
#217
But zizero, you seem to have quite a good knowledge about history. How come?
0
ben2111
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#218
Report 14 years ago
#218
(Original post by JSM)
no marx did not write about communism, but not all socialists follow marx either. Have you actually read das kapital (i mean the original is in german-so should be easy). Give me an example of a successful socialist state then, if they dont fail, and communism and socialism are both a species of collectivism. So they are in fact related.
I said they failed, read my text please.
No I did not manage to read das kapital cause I find this stuff extremely hard to digest, to be honest. Maybe I should
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#219
Report 14 years ago
#219
(Original post by ben2111)
With the bridges you are wrong. Mandela was never active in neighbouring countries demolishing anything as far as I am concerned. and a bit more respect wouldnt be bad either. His achievements are incredible. Please do me the favour and never embarass yourself with such statements when there is anybody from South Africa around, they will slaughter you straight away.
in what way, he has been buyilt up into a mythical figure, like Mother teresa or martin luther king and you can not say any wrong about him.

He was active in neighbouring countries, do a search on the net
His achievements - what about the rest of the ANC then, why does the media have to spotlight on an individual not a group.

they will be unable to slaughter me
0
material breach
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#220
Report 14 years ago
#220
(Original post by Vienna95)
the americans intervene to protect a peoples right to exist.

germany
kosovo
israel
kuwait.
wait hold up! i dont believe that vienna made such a mess of answering the question a couple of pages ago!

america intervenes to protect people rights to exist, rubbish! america intervenes due to self intrest: vietnam is a perfect example of this! supporting barbairic dictator and dropping more bombs than used in the whole of both world wars on a third world country, hmmm yes protecting the people right.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (62)
75.61%
Leave (20)
24.39%

Watched Threads

View All