Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The National Party

1121122124126127151

Comments

  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    A straight answer would. You’re arguing that socialism = Marxism. It doesn’t.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    An honest answer would be that any time socialism has been implemented the result has been an overall reduction in quality of life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion all led by, every single time no less, a dictator or ruling elite living high on the hog while the masses suffer and often starve to death.

    I'm seeing the old tropes being rolled out now, Stalin was a corruption of Socialism, the USSR was fine until Josef took over, forgetting the crimes of Vladimir Lenin, Marx would be spinning in his grave, blah blah blah.

    It boggles the mind how many people are willing to tie themselves up in knots defending an ideology that proven to be ineffective and inhumane decades ago while having a go at its right wing counterpart which incidentally never had as many applications as socialism yet somehow is the only extremist view any of us should be afraid of.

    We need to cop on and get away from this extremist crap, currently the political landscape is becoming a lot more polarised in this country, the far left and the far right flinging mud at each other, capturing peoples attention while real issues get ignored at the expense of everyone.

    We have had far left politicians in opposition for years, they hav no answers, they only exist to scaremonger and keep themselves relevant.

    The answer to the far right isn't the far left, it's to grow up and let common sense dictate, not extreme ideology.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    "An honest answer would be that any time socialism has been implemented the result has been an overall reduction in quality of life, freedom of expression, freedom of religion all led by, every single time no less, a dictator or ruling elite living high on the hog while the masses suffer and often starve to death."

    Funny you say that while living in social democracy. Socialists brought you sick pay, mandatory holidays, mandatory parental leave, the elimination of child labour and many many more features of modern western society.

    Socialism =/= Marxism. But even then some Marxists are alright. The trade union movement was full of them for a long time. You wouldn't be free to sit around arguing with me on the internet if it wasn't for them.

    Socialism=/= Extremism either. It's a spectrum from Social Democrats to Anarchists.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    One of my beefs with Marx was his belief that a strong vanguard state was needed to implement a socialist system, which would then dissolve as it became unnecessary. No Karl, it isn't and it won't.

    I don't think Marx would have had huge problems with Lenin or Trotsky. Stalin would have horrified him no doubt. But Marx's hands aren't as clear as you describe, when it comes to the USSR.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,459 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Funny how when it's fascism doing the exact same things, the NP crowd are completely silent.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,009 ✭✭✭Shoog


    So people who espouse conservatism are responsible for Hitler and Mussolini by your logic.

    Surely you see how pathetic your leap of logic is - because a philosophy always leads directly to a murderous dictator.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,629 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    You really don't understand what socialism is if this is what you are still coming out with.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Socialism is nice and fluffy apparently.

    It didn't kill tens of millions of people in the last century, that was just down to people getting socialism wrong again and again, a misunderstanding is all.

    Having moderate left and right forces makes a democratic society work. Socialism isn't moderate when left to it's own devices, we all know this to be true but living in a free tolerant capitalist system means not everyone is a success so it must be evil, and socialism must be the answer.

    Socialism is the politics of envy, capitalism isn't fair and far from perfect but I'll take it over living in a socialist distopia any day, similarly to how I wouldn't want to live in a far right system.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Socialism is not envious of anything. It is about treating people equally and with respect.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,459 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Sending people to gulags is a sign of respect?

    You're cherry picking the parts of Socialism that suit you.

    If there was a fascist on here extolling the virtues of Mussolini making the trains run on time you wouldn't put up with it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    What part?

    That socialism killed tens of millions of people? Seriously, don't be so bloody obtuse.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,459 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Nothing but the usual pathetic defence of fascists. We're done here.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,136 ✭✭✭nachouser


    Is this the socialism thread?? I thought it was the thread about the actual nazi lovers affiliated with The National Party?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Defence of fascists?

    Show where I've once defended fascists then...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,365 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    I think it's more a case that you try to derail any thread about them and downplay the danger they pose. Instead it's the left that are the real problem.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 766 ✭✭✭scottser


    'Cherry picking the parts of Socialism that suits you' is not in itself a bad thing. Things like social housing, free healthcare, free education, water and sanitation, common use of roads and infrastructure, parks and lands to protection of human and civil rights. If you think that all Socialism leads to dicatorships and genocides you are wildly and fantastically wrong. In fact, it is the Socialists who continue to fight for these things that you take for granted when Capitalists see them as either barriers to trade or assets to be leveraged and sold.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,459 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Exactly. The same thing happens any time the Nazis get criticised as surely as night follows day.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    You completely ignored my point. Socialism is fluffy, as I said in the post you’ve ignored. It’s a spectrum, it isn’t one United political philosophy.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Nonsense.

    I've been plenty critical of the National Party here.

    The idea that one set of extremist beliefs trump another is frankly pathetic.

    I despise far right and far left idiots equally, if you want to excuse one set of these wing nuts and vilify just one of them you're not an honest operator.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,491 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    One of my beefs with Marx was his belief that a strong vanguard state was needed to implement a socialist system, which would then dissolve as it became unnecessary. No Karl, it isn't and it won't.

    Well, that was Marx's "revolutionary period" necessity, as part of the transition to Socialism and then toward Communism. He believed that a period of controlled stability was a "necessary evil", but one which had to be closely observed by the proletariat, lest it turn into a ruling class of a slightly different flavour than the one it replaced. Unfortunately, it depends one whose hands are at the tiler as to whether they would allow the reins to, eventually, be handed over and to whom. Also, the proletariat in Russia was quite small, the largest being a subjected peasant class. So the required checks and balances from the workers, in Marxist thinking, rested on a relatively small amount of shoulders. That allows a nefarious political body to thrive.

    I don't think Marx would have had huge problems with Lenin or Trotsky. Stalin would have horrified him no doubt. But Marx's hands aren't as clear as you describe, when it comes to the USSR.

    Hmmm, having read quite a bit about the figures concerned, I wouldn't be so sure that Marx would have been all that fond of the Leninist view, while probably agreeing with where Lenin wanted Russia to eventually go. Trotsky would be a different matter, though, and he's a figure that I could imagine would share a lot of common ground with Marx. There's certainly a case to be made that Marx would have viewed the Bolshevik revolution as an interesting and welcome experiment, especially considering the awful state of affairs that preceded it and he would have been very welcoming of the end to the Tsarist rule in Russia. But I cannot see that warm reception lasting too long myself. Certainly if Marx had lived to see 1920/21 or a little bit beyond, I think he would have rejected the revolution altogether. But it isn't a clear cut thing, I'll grant you that.

    But, as you say, once we get to Uncle Joe, there would have been no dithering about Marx's feelings on where it all went.

    However, Marx and Russia are very uneasy bedfellows. Marx thought very little of Russia and considered it a backwards nation. He wouldn't have thought that a workers revolution would have been even possible there, because there was a lack of industrialisation and therefore a lack of a working class. Marx's idea of Socialist revolution was a workers revolt against the ruling classes and nobility. He never thought that Russia would have even been ready for such a thing, because it was a bottom heavy agricultural system. Remember, serfdom in Russia was only ended 20 years before Marx died. He also would have viewed Russia's revolution as a bit of an unnatural one, because it was born out of war with a foreign nation, Germany, and the conditions that Marx viewed as the "right" ones just weren't present. In other words, the October revolution has a lot of its roots in the fight against outside actors and not solely ones that were within.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Are you proposing that all positive changes in society have been brought to us by socialism?



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    I don’t disagree with any of that. I think Marx, and most socialist thinkers, expected a revolution in Germany or Britain before anywhere else. They both had massive industrial bases and consequently a huge urban proletariat. Russians population was largely rural and really wasn’t suitable for the the type of revolution Marx envisioned.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    I made you a list earlier, but you seem to be ignoring it.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,363 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Lets take sick leave as an example, an idea that predates socialism yet you say socialism ushered it in.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    The idea might pre date socialism, which I don’t accept as fact, but it being codified in law certainly doesn’t. It’s the law because of the hard work of unions. Unions who were founded and lead by socialists. The notion of organised labour is socialist to begin with.

    You seem to want to ignore the good things socialism has given you and focus on the extremes. Why?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 766 ✭✭✭scottser


    No, but I will state that the benefits for society from collectivist thinking far outweigh those driven by profit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,136 ✭✭✭nachouser


    Left leaning = gulags, apparently.

    At some point they'll complain that they can't possibly be expected to respond to all of the replies to the deflecting argument they've made. Ad finitum. Yawn.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,136 ✭✭✭nachouser


    3. Opposition to Mass Immigration and a Commitment to Remigration

    The National Party supports the ending of all mass immigration into Ireland. Further, we support a positive policy of remigration in order to secure Ireland as the homeland of the Irish people.

    Central to this commitment to remigration is the Party’s focus on encouraging and incentivising the return of exiled members of the Irish nation, as well as primarily utilising the diaspora as a source for any potential labour shortfalls.

    The National Party - discuss how this isn't the most crazy thing ever?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,058 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Deflection.

    Easier than trying to big up the National Party and its "policies"



Advertisement