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.
For context:
500kg cash in 100 USD bills (like on the picture) would be roughly 50.000.000 USD.
And 500kg of Gold would currently be 71,396,000 USD.
That is okay. Their silence is louder anyway.
I can respect that. Focused, determined, protective!
I thought it was fun…
The thing is… not doing it at all, is better than doing those 300 moves. What made you do this? Also a bit spicy?
Yes. Why?
Most people? 100% not. Me who has probably autism and has internalised the algorithm, I can.
I love and hate my brain.
His crypto monologue in out of the episodes killed it for me. I didn’t disagree on the ideals, if i remember right, but it was just disconnected from reality. It was a “if he is that willfully ignoring reality because he is passionate, maybe I shouldn’t listen to him when he is talking about something that he is passionate about.”
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?
Okay, so when workers cause damages to the society to stand up to the capitalists and fight against exploition of labour, that is cool.
When people find it funny that capitalists aren’t checking their sources while exploiting labour, then that is not cool.
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.