Are socialists psychopaths? Watch

eastasianguy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
Socialists are either people who want to leech from other peoples money, or people who love spending other peoples money for their own self aggrandisement.

Ed Milliband is a typical example of a millionaire socialist who loves making himself feel better by promising charity with other peoples money.

The instinct of socialists to feel entitled to other peoples money is surely a psychopathic trait?

What annoys me is that they wrap up this mentality in the 'holier than thou' language, which again is another sign of their psychopathic nature.

Surely spending other people money and making them feel guilty for not handing it over is psychopathic?
0
reply
driftawaay
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
Surely your opinion is considered psychopathic by socialists?
1
reply
StarvingAutist
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
I think socialism is incompatible with psychopathy. Socialism typically puts great importance in empathy. Socialists want to help the poorest and get people as equal as possible in terms of wealth. A psychopath could never abide that - psychopaths always want power.
Furthermore, you're most likely to find a psychopath in the corporate world - "every man for himself"; that is both capitalist and psychopathic ideology.
4
reply
eastasianguy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by StarvingAutist)
I think socialism is incompatible with psychopathy. Socialism typically puts great importance in empathy. Socialists want to help the poorest and get people as equal as possible in terms of wealth. A psychopath could never abide that - psychopaths always want power.
Furthermore, you're most likely to find a psychopath in the corporate world - "every man for himself"; that is both capitalist and psychopathic ideology.
Yes, empathy with other peoples money.....ie, other peoples sweat and toil.

Psychopaths want power, which is another sign of socialism, because they want state monopoly. But, also, psychopaths use guilt and shame tactics to manipulate people.

Psychopaths are also defined by their ability to use emotions against people for their own benefit.
0
reply
battycatlady
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
Hell no. Socialists simply happen to care a heck of a lot about oppressed groups, namely the poor, disabled people and LGBTQ+ folks.
1
reply
eastasianguy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by battycatlady)
Hell no. Socialists simply happen to care a heck of a lot about oppressed groups, namely the poor, disabled people and LGBTQ+ folks.
I am a Conservative and i care for oppressed groups as well. Its just that Conservatives don't think spending other peoples money to solve problems is the correct thing to do.
0
reply
StarvingAutist
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by eastasianguy)
Yes, empathy with other peoples money.....ie, other peoples sweat and toil.

Psychopaths want power, which is another sign of socialism, because they want state monopoly. But, also, psychopaths use guilt and shame tactics to manipulate people.

Psychopaths are also defined by their ability to use emotions against people for their own benefit.
Well, it actually depends on the socialist you ask as to whether they want a state. Most wouldn't want a dictatorship.
Could you explain to me how capitalism exemplifies empathy?
0
reply
hockham jaynsaw
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
Quaint idea but a psychopath doesn't feel guilt and a psychopath doesn't feel shame. A psychopath who is also a champagne socialist is only so because the image benefits him -- to look like he cares. Clearly as a rich business owner, he'd prefer capitalism.

A psychopath who is also poor would of course advocate socialism, even if he knows it doesn't make sense for the rich to do it, because it benefits him.

I actually (unofficially) scored positive for psychopathy when tested by a psychologist. The only area I'm missing to not be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder is a record of imprisonment. I have an underactive amygdala, etc
0
reply
eastasianguy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by StarvingAutist)
Well, it actually depends on the socialist you ask as to whether they want a state. Most wouldn't want a dictatorship.
Could you explain to me how capitalism exemplifies empathy?
Well, socialism without a state is impossible. So such people would be anarchists are therefore ultra right wing in economic terms.

As for capitalism being emphatic, well, i don't think it necessary is, but at least they are not roaming around on their high horse telling the world how compassionate they are.
0
reply
StarvingAutist
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by eastasianguy)
Well, socialism without a state is impossible. So such people would be anarchists are therefore ultra right wing in economic terms.

As for capitalism being emphatic, well, i don't think it necessary is, but at least they are not roaming around on their high horse telling the world how compassionate they are.
Anarcho-capitalism is not generally accepted amongst other anarchists as genuine anarchy. Left wing anarchists are predominant (for an example, see the Socialist Party of Great Britain).

Ah, okay, so you don't have an argument
0
reply
eastasianguy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by StarvingAutist)
Anarcho-capitalism is not generally accepted amongst other anarchists as genuine anarchy. Left wing anarchists are predominant (for an example, see the Socialist Party of Great Britain).

Ah, okay, so you don't have an argument
So please just tell me how socialism is possible without a state?

How can one be an anarchist without advocating the abolition of the state?

There is no such thing as Anarcho-capitalism. Anarchism is not anarchism if you advocate even the smallest state.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
No they're just idealists and usually middle classed and stingy


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by eastasianguy)
So please just tell me how socialism is possible without a state?
By the workers controlling the meansof production. That's what socialism is.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by eastasianguy)

How can one be an anarchist without advocating the abolition of the state?
cage = state

"Exactly. When I talked to the anarchist group in Buenos Aires, we discussed this. Everybody basically had the same recognition. There’s an interesting slogan that’s used. We didn’t mention this, but quite apart from the Workers Party and the urban unions, there’s also a very lively rural workers organization. Millions of workers have become organized into rural unions which are very rarely discussed. One of the slogans that they use which is relevant here, is that we should "expand the floor of the cage." We know we’re in a cage. We know we’re trapped. We’re going to expand the floor, meaning we will extend to the limits what the cage will allow. And we intend to destroy the cage. But not by attacking the cage when we’re vulnerable, so they’ll murder us. That’s completely correct. You have to protect the cage when it’s under attack from even worse predators from outside, like private power. And you have to expand the floor of the cage, recognizing that it’s a cage. These are all preliminaries to dismantling it. Unless people are willing to tolerate that level of complexity, they’re going to be of no use to people who are suffering and who need help, or, for that matter, to themselves." -Chomsky

Basically of strengthening of the cage in a certain way creates more freedom, equality, more accountable hierarchies, more democracy etc then that is a step in the right direction. Could call it reformist anarchism.
0
reply
The_Mighty_Bush
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
It's a misanthropic ideology that relies on the dangerous illusion of egalitarianism.
0
reply
Falcatas
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
Socialists are just a more sinister branch of statist. Both support the use of initiatory violence.
Socialists claim they are in the right by screaming about equality. Equality however is a dangerous contradiction.

Humans are not born equal. The natural order is one of inequality. By trying to resist against this natural order they contradict themselves because it means treating people unequal.

How can you claim to believe in equality if it is permissible to steal and rob from some people but no others?
0
reply
MatthewParis
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by Falcatas)
Both support the use of initiatory violence.
Such an argument can only be consistent if it is used against all laws.

Your argument therefore falls unless you are an anarchist

How can you claim to believe in equality if it is permissible to steal and rob from some people but no others?
What do you mean steal and rob? Theft and robbery are illegal, no matter who does it
0
reply
MatthewParis
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by anarchism101)
By the workers controlling the meansof production. That's what socialism is.
So what prevents the workers deciding to sell off the means of production for an immediate hit of cash?
0
reply
Falcatas
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by MatthewParis)
Such an argument can only be consistent if it is used against all laws.

Your argument therefore falls unless you are an anarchist



What do you mean steal and rob? Theft and robbery are illegal, no matter who does it


I am an anarchist and my point stands. Responding to aggression is not aggression itself so you cannot compare self defence and punishment to aggression (or initation of force).

Theft and robbery are legal if you are the state. Without giving any concessions to the state, taxation is nothing more than theft.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by MatthewParis)
So what prevents the workers deciding to sell off the means of production for an immediate hit of cash?
In what sense sell them? And to who?

If you're asking what I think you are, it's a bit like asking what prevents people from selling themselves into slavery in a society where slavery is abolished.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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

Do you get study leave?

Yes- I like it (374)
59.08%
Yes- I don't like it (34)
5.37%
No- I want it (180)
28.44%
No- I don't want it (45)
7.11%

Watched Threads

View All