The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Socialism is Good; Socialism is pro-life; Socialism is pro-People, pro-Planet

Incidentally, what the Declaration does do, is spell out why the Founding Fathers who were about to commit treason, felt justified in doing so.
 
Legal and valid are very different things. YOU may believe they are the same, I don't. The D of I certainly tells you what philosophies were used to justify the revolution - and all revolutions start with treason; but it isn't part of our government. It confers no rights, defines no law.
 
Occams Cajun said:
Amiericans have the right to abolish the government and constitution and start over.
Click to expand...

Everyone has that right -- that was the point of the Declaration, that all men have the rights stated, and that all men have not just a right, but a duty, to throw off tyranny.

TX-Beau said:
The Declaration of Independence is not a legal document, it has no force of law.
Click to expand...

Following the above, it was and remains a legal document in a broad sense of the word: it was an appeal to all peoples over the concept of the rights of kings to the rights of people, even individuals, setting forth that "all men are created equal", and arguing from that a legal position that revolution was not merely an acceptable, but the proper course of action.

TX-Beau said:
Incidentally, what the Declaration does do, is spell out why the Founding Fathers who were about to commit treason, felt justified in doing so.
Click to expand...

Actually it spells out the case that the British Crown had committed treason against them, and why they were obliged not only to defend themselves, but to separate all ties with the treasonous institution, the better to achieve that defense.

In a way I think this links to Kern's rather vague and mystical concept of socialism here: the American revolution was 'socialist' in that it was a social movement, a movement of people asserting their (ancient and traditional) rights over against a monolithic version of society that emphasized the monarch, not the people. Individuals were declared to be that; they were no longer subjects, effective extensions of a monarch's will, but persons, extensions of their own wills -- yet also of their communities, since public opinion was hearkened to seriously, even in the big cities which today we would regard mostly as but towns.
 
Kurn said:
You see, socialism is a creative premise, not a legalistic one. No, don't look across the ocean for what socialism is, although the Scandinavian countries have given the idea a good shot.
Again, don't look anywhere else for what socialism is. Look within. Let it come out from within. Within you is a world of people who copulated over the millenia in order to bring YOU into existence. Much of their lives were virtuous lives; much of their lives were scandalous or foolish in varying degrees. But rely upon your better instincts and your better, more humane reason that has evolved over millions of years and you can be a part of surviving into future millenia. The voices in your flesh, the voices of all your ancestors drive you forward to survive, to survive in flesh, to survive in spirit.

To do so, we have to cut out the crap and co-operate. Work hard for a better world.
Socialism doesn't have to be radically different from what we're familiar with. But it does need radical visions in each person to be the better person that they can be.
Click to expand...


Try telling that to Stalin. That worked out great didn't it!
 
I found this awesome quote about socialism:

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." --- Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931 - 2005
 
Civil rights and money are NOT tied together. In fact those with money routinely end up trampling on the civil rights of others.

Your quote makes a lot of assumptions about poor people "wanting to be taken care of."

Much like Regan's imaginary welfare queen, that he made up to scare the nation with the exact same argument.
 
The idea that providing things like universal health care and education is going to result in a nation of people where the wealthy have no freedom and the poor lol about with their government check is ridiculous. There are people in every country who are lazy despite their wealth and poor people who are extremely industrious.

Poverty is far more expensive than social safety nets that provide for education and sustenance. Are there good and bad ways to implement this? Sure, but the underlying claim, that all socialism leads to what, anarchy? Is specious.
 
JohannBessler said:
This is the biggest bunch of bullshit I've ever read on JUB.

Whoever said anything about not wanting to work? The problem is the opposite! A lot of people want to work, and there is no work for them. As I sit here typing, more and more people are becoming unemployed, more people are losing their houses, and more people have simply given up their search for work.

The principle tenets of true socialism are that each individual has an inherent right to full employment, housing, and health care.
Click to expand...

The American welfare system is proof positive that what you just said is a bunch of over-optimistic garbage. People get welfare and they don't work. Not because they can't, but because they don't want to. They get money from the government for sitting on their asses, so they see no need to work. The fastest way to get someone to work is to tell them that their free money is ending, that they MUST get a job if they want to continue to receive help.

If you think that expanding welfare will somehow not cause more of these people to stay at home when they could (and should) be working, you're living on another fucking planet.
 
TX-Beau said:
Civil rights and money are NOT tied together. In fact those with money routinely end up trampling on the civil rights of others.

Your quote makes a lot of assumptions about poor people "wanting to be taken care of."

Much like Regan's imaginary welfare queen, that he made up to scare the nation with the exact same argument.
Click to expand...

Except a lot of them do. Our welfare system has created the mindset that 'I'm poor, so I deserve to get money from the government'. That is an absolutely disgusting environment and mindset to create in people.
 
CGHJ said:
I found this awesome quote about socialism:

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." --- Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931 - 2005
Click to expand...

The first point of socialism is not to distribute the wealth earned by the people, but the means that make the production of this wealth possible in the first place. (Notably land).

Many white Americans do not get this, as they live in a post-colonialist, post-fronteer society where the government actually wanted to give the farmers property (which it had in abundance) in exchange for tax-monies they wouldn't otherwise have gotten.

Now place this in contrast with Europe where farmers were forced to rent the property they needed (often at extortionate prices) to make a living. The income of the people who held the land (the nobility) was taxed, but the property wasn't and so they could pinch their tennants indefinitely.

The same mechanism applied to housing.

People couldn't better themselves no matter how hard they worked, and could no longer count on the protection of the Guilds. This cause several historic reactions. One was socialism (the other was fascism).
 
Droid800 said:
Except a lot of them do. Our welfare system has created the mindset that 'I'm poor, so I deserve to get money from the government'. That is an absolutely disgusting environment and mindset to create in people.
Click to expand...

Droid800 said:
The American welfare system is proof positive that what you just said is a bunch of over-optimistic garbage. People get welfare and they don't work. Not because they can't, but because they don't want to. They get money from the government for sitting on their asses, so they see no need to work. The fastest way to get someone to work is to tell them that their free money is ending, that they MUST get a job if they want to continue to receive help.

If you think that expanding welfare will somehow not cause more of these people to stay at home when they could (and should) be working, you're living on another fucking planet.
Click to expand...

LOL....... People get welfare because they don't have enough income survive. Not because they have gainful employment and just decide they don't want to work any more. And we’re not discussing welfare. We’re discussing socialism.

Droid800 said:
Except a lot of them do. Our welfare system has created the mindset that 'I'm poor, so I deserve to get money from the government'. That is an absolutely disgusting environment and mindset to create in people.
Click to expand...

Here’s what you just did. I said A, you started at D, jumped all the way to Z, then got all disgusted with Z.

All the above two posts are, is reactionary right wing bullshit that means nothing.
 
CowboyBob said:
This is the epitome of arrogant thinking: "They just don't want to work". Making statements like this prove you have never dealt with welfare recipients, you're never seen desperately poor families. Communities where there are no jobs, homeless on the streets, hungry people. It's just so much easier to just demonize the people least able to defend themselves. Let's demonize those welfare mothers!

Droid, when you get older, more traveled and better educated, you'll discover there are legions of people much worse off than you, and it's not their fault. There will always be poor people who need assistance.

For those of you who label yourself "Christian" and Republican, there was a fellow named Jesus Christ who was the son of God. Ever hear of him? He made a statement in this book called "The Bible" (hear of that one?).... "The poor you will always have with you".

I challenge anyone who subscribes to this brand of arrogance to actually go and discover the joys of a welfare Christmas. After all, they don't want to work, do they?

Geeez, I still can't believe someone actually thinks like that!
Click to expand...

I live in a community that is ravaged by unemployment and a full 25% of which live (far) below the poverty line. I know there are people out there that want to work, and that there are also people out there that CAN work, but would rather receive welfare checks and sit at home instead.

Read what I'm actually saying again. Nowhere did I accuse all people on welfare of choosing to stay at home instead of working. There ARE people that genuinely could have and retain jobs and get off welfare, but choose not to. The problem is that for a lot of that group, there is no incentive to get a job and get off welfare. (like the threat of losing welfare if they don't get even a minimum wage job to start weaning them off the government teat)
 
To see how much better socialism works than capitalism, we have only to look at Venezuela, which is transforming from a (mostly) free market capitalist society into a socialist one.

To be sure, I bet a lot of you think Chavez is a hero who is empowering his people by giving them land.

Watch that space for further developments, we shall soon see how that works out.

Or, look to China, which is transforming from a communist/socialist society into a capitalist one, or Poland, or Russia. All of them have lots of socialist elements in place but they realized that capitalism is the engine that allows the passenger of socialism his free ride. To the extent that they have been able to adopt capitalism, their economies have thrived.

Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Dubai...all super capitalist, all thriving. Even China was smart enough to leave Hong Kong's capitalist economy alone.

And seriously, Paris over Santa Barbara? I've been to both places too...whens the last time there were massive riots in Santa Barbara?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top