Tbf… if they are facetiming… some energy is spend to them…

What is the connection to your claims that nazis are social Democrats or that democratic socialism is fascism?

Why can’t you just google things for once?

I think a division of power is important, as are: fair and free elections, multiple options in the elections, social programs to ensure the population has the resources to take part in the process, low corruption (ideally none but that is unrealistic). There is probably more but I am done doing your homework.

I will block you now, as you are the most clueless tankie that I have met to an embarrassing degree, so I think you are full of shit and not a tankie. I mean calling yourself a tankie and calling socialism fascistic is wild. Calling nazis social Democrats is more believable for a tankie but I am fairly certain they would realise that murdering disabled people isn’t fulfilling the “social” part in social democracy and e.g. the lack of fair and free elections doesn’t really match with the “democracy” part.

What? Do you understand logic?

If something fails to fulfill 1 requirement, It can’t pass anymore, otherwise it is not a requirement.

If you are not a woman, you can’t be a 186cm tall woman. You can be 186cm tall, but you aren’t a woman, so you can’t be a 186cm tall woman.

So if being multiparty is a requirement for being a democracy, then not being multiparty, makes you not a democracy. Even if you pass all other requirements.

They aren’t used interchangeably? Unless you are talking about people who also use communism and socialism interchangeably, then sure but i don’t think we should have a discussion on nazi politics based on utter lack of knowledge what words mean.

I implied that historically speaking Leninist Revolution led to single party systems? I mean yeah. That is just fact.

But you understand how saying “1 party systems aren’t democratic” doesn’t mean “multiparty systems are democratic”? If anything, it means “multiparty is one of the requirements of a democracy”.

e.g. i don’t think America is a proper democracy. Technically speaking, a person with 21% of the votes could win the presidential election. Yes, even if the other candidate has 79% of the votes. The obvious corruption and Oligarchy is another issue. I would argue that the use of voting computers makes them undemocratic. And there are probably more reasons but I am lazy.

I never said multiparty means democracy. But okay.

Who said it was hogwash? Who said it presents no threat to status quo?

We are talking about how the nazis weren’t socialist, or social Democrats. And how you don’t know the difference between social democracy and democratic socialism. And to say that you are a tankie after saying that socialism is capitalism, is wild.

Well, tankies might disagree with me on some of this.

Democratic socialism got popular under socialist that opposed the Soviet Union.

China would like to be seen as democratic and would like to be socialistic but they are effectively a one party system (not very democratic) and they have special economic zones and simplified: the state owns the meaning of production and the worker only by proxy. China admit that they aren’t socialist yet but that they are working towards it. So currently not socialist, and the state owned means of production is in conflict with democratic socialism (or at least, that is my opinion and given that it became popular in opposition to the Soviet Union, I think I have a good case for that)

The whole state owned means of production issue and/or 1 party system, tend to be the reasons why no country was considered a democratic socialist country to my knowledge.

The distinction is between socialism and capitalism.

There are no democratic socialist countries.

Germany is a social democracy.

Socialism is not the same as democratic.

Socialism describe how Property right should work.

Democratic describe how the government works.

Both are independent Ideologies.

Socialism is not capitalism and to claim that is ridiculous.

Nope.

Democratic socialism is socialism. So the idea that workers should own the mean of production. But it is Democratic. So the government should be Democratic.

Social democracy is capitalism. But that it should be Democratic and soften the weakness of capitalism by providing social programs.

You see, 1 is capitalism, the other is socialism.

Because that guy uses words without knowing their meaning. That is why I want his definition. So he either acknowledge his lack of knowledge or learn or stay silent.

Social Democracy is not the same as democratic socialism. (E.g. germany understands itself as a social democracy but don’t do socialism nor democratic socialism)

The nazi murdered democratic socialists though.

Could you define fascism and socialism, please? For the sake of the argument, as you seem confused over social democracy and democratic socialism.

Saying that is about as stupid and uninformed as it gets.

Please, seriously please, look into actual nazi policies and ask yourself if those policies fit the claim.

Please look at the actions of the nazis. E.g. the Night of the long knives. Or ask if the systematic murders of disabled people, would be something that fits with social Democrats values.

Every historian with a focus on nazi germany disagrees with you.

That is okay. Their silence is louder anyway.

Do you understand how wealth is made?

Just think about it for half a second.

You have resources, like money, stuff and time. That is your wealth. Now, how do you earn more wealth? Maybe by working? Let’s say 1 hour of your time is $100 worth, if you work 1 hr and get $100, You just change 1 resource for another. So if you trade your time for money, you didn’t earn wealth. But what if you don’t actually work a full hr but get paid $100 anyway, then you increased your wealth, but you also stole wealth from your employer after all, they paid you for 1 hr of work. Alternatively, you can work 1 hr but get paid $110, then you could argue that you don’t cheat your employer as they agreed to the deal but they still lose wealth as they get less than what it cost them. Let’s say, you don’t sell your time but your work. Well your time is still worth something but you don’t sell it anymore. Your time might still be $100 per hr but you sell your e.g. Software, not your time. To have that software, you have to get it first. So you write it. But writing software is a trade too, basically another time for stuff trade, juat with yourself. So if you don’t want to lose wealth, we need to calculate the cost of getting the software and sell it appropriately. Let’s say the software was 1200 hrs of work. So if you want to exchange the software for money now, you need to charge $120.000 otherwise you lost wealth. So you can sell the software for more but then you again took someone else’s wealth as they would be paying more for what it is worth. Selling stuff in general has that issue. Using money to buy stuff and selling more expensive included.

For you to earn wealth, someone needs to lose it.

So when a single person has a ridiculous amount of wealth, the question is “is their time worth that much?”

Elon musk is roughly 28,382,400 minutes old. Forbes estimated his wealth to 838 billions. For his wealth to be justifiable, 1 minute of his time would need to be worth $29.525.

A heart surgeon in the us earns roughly $1.200.000, they work 60-80hrs per week. A year has 52 weeks. So 52*60, 3210 hrs for $1.200.000, or 192,600 minutes. That means a heart surgeon times is worth $6,23 per minutes. 0.02% of what elon’s time would need to be worth.

4,724 heart surgeons working 1 minute would be worth the same as Elon work 1 minute.

And we are ignoring that Elon wasn’t working when he was 2 seconds after he was born. We are including the time Elon spend shitting his pants as a baby, and minutes of his day even when he is not working, and excluding all the time that the surgeon is not working, like when they see their family or when they were studying or a baby. So the surgeon time is much less worth and Elon’s time is more worth if we would bother to make the perfect comparison.

So do you honestly and sincerely believe that elon’s time is worth the same as 4724 heart surgeons even in this poor comparison that is simple wealth divided by lifetime vs salary divided by working hours?

Or… is his wealth based on wealth that he took from others?

Isn’t 7.2 currently minimum wage and consequently, if Charlie would have been right, the government had more money… and that is bad?

I feel very comfortable with saying that they symbolise the failures of the human races much better than almost anything else.

1. Fascism - there is an obvious link
2. Classism - there is an obvious link
3. Pedophilia - there is an obvious link
4. Colonisation- there is an obvious link
5. Exploitation …
6. Politics by old people for old people
7. Traditionalism
8. …
9. …

You get the point. What is wrong with the world? A picture of these people would be a matching picture, no matter what answer you want to provide.

I am 100% with you but I just wonder wtf they think.

In all seriousness, have you ever met a woman who “just” had an abortion? Without any internal struggle? Who “just” made an appointment, walked in, walked out? Not scared of how close it was to an life altering event for the woman? With not difficult feelings to the possible child? “Just” another day in her life?

Anyone?

I just don’t believe that those women exist in large numbers but it feels like they think that is what every abortion is.

Ps: his example feels weirdly specific to me.

The problem is the following:

They are primarily classist in the more general sense. They believe that some class of people are above another class of people. E.g. rich above the poor, one race above the other, …

They are both socio-economic classist and racist.

Because they are both, their racism is trying to use their socio-economic classist ideas to justify their racism. E.g.: they might receive help from social programs but in their mind, they aren’t the lower class because the actual lower class of illegal aliens are stealing the jobs and resources that would allow them to take their rightful spot in a higher class. That is why they are concerned about e.g. taxing the rich.

But both because reality is not their fantasy and because they believe that the system is somewhat merit based, they have to explain why these hardworking alliens are not climbing the socio-economic labber… so aliens have to be lazy!

Consequently aliens are stealing the jobs, so the classist falls undeservingly to a lower class BUT they are also lazy to explain the lack of socio-economic growth for those aliens.

Then those classist morons will get together to organise themselves. Obviously one of the leading notion is the lack of class for the members of the movement, as that is how they understand the world. And obviously the people within the movement with a higher socio-economic class have the opportunity to take advantage of their higher class and get power in the movement. If they are a little smart, they will point at the “lowest” class and blame them.

Then we get movements like maga or the afd. Both state openly that they want to harm the lower classes (as they are supposedly lazy/criminal/evil). Obviously the classist, who obviously want to be a higher class, are fundamentally competitive to each other which destablize the movement. Alliances are built on utility. Once the higher class member are in the highest position, loyalty to others doesn’t provide added value but loyalty to the leader provides perceived value to the followers. Consequently the movement tries to help the higher classes instead of the lower classes that originally joined to get support to escape the unfair system that prevented them to reach a higher class.

Ofc the higher ones in the movement are classists as well and look at the lower class members as little more valuable than the alliens and consequently they have no real interest in removing the aliens as they are cheaper labor which helps the elite.

And that is why fundamentally racism movements tend to fail to actually do the racism in the way that the racist wants. And instead are primarily performative. And the movement is primarily classist and not racist, the poor racist are no different to the lower races for a rich racist. So the poor racist get fucked over too.

And these racist idiots fall for the same scam again and again and again. They just don’t understand that the fundamental ideals of their moment causes them to be fucked over unless they are at the top. Metaphorically speaking, Racists join a MLM and believe they will be rich 1 day.

Edit: I forgot to mention that these movements tend to be tribal and create additional classes like “rino” (Republican in name only), which pushes the movement away from their racist roots towards a more vague classist notion.

AND I HAVE TO STRESS THEY ARE STILL RACIST AND THEY STILL HARM THOSE “RACES”. but not in the way, the majority of racist want them to.

Well, the bodyshaming is not limited to “morbidly obese” people. https://slrpnk.net/post/35736444

But if you deal with a fascist and your insults of choice is about their appearance… wtf are you doing? There is not better insults for fascists? “Hahaha fat” is the choice? And “fat” jokes hit all “fat” people, not only the “morbidly obese”. Body dysmorphia is real. People with eating disorders tend to think that they are fat.

Also I haven’t seen a lot of mocking of smokers but the number of smokers is going down… lack of mockery is no issue. People just want to be allowed to be cruel.

And where is the mockery for joining ice? Or do we want them to get fit, instead of stop being part of ice?