US Foreign Policy

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:10 am

cassowary wrote:
Sat Jan 06, 2018 10:16 pm

I believe that the first step to realizing your Socialist vision must be taken by you, yourself. So start redistributing your wealth to those less fortunate than you in the world. Give generously. Help them to gain a decent life, roof over their heads, healthcare, and a good education. .This of course, requires money. Your Socialist method is redistribution of wealth. So start your redistribution by donating your money.
Even you must realize that social problems cannot be solved individually. What you propose is pure nonsense. The solution for communal problems must be solved within and by the community. First, your local community, then your national community, your regional community and, in the end, the global community. Which requires sharing. And if you don't want to share, you do not really belong to any community and should live on your own, solving alone all your problems and satisfying alone all your needs. Ready to try?...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1601
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by cassowary » Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:25 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:10 am
cassowary wrote:
Sat Jan 06, 2018 10:16 pm

I believe that the first step to realizing your Socialist vision must be taken by you, yourself. So start redistributing your wealth to those less fortunate than you in the world. Give generously. Help them to gain a decent life, roof over their heads, healthcare, and a good education. .This of course, requires money. Your Socialist method is redistribution of wealth. So start your redistribution by donating your money.
Even you must realize that social problems cannot be solved individually. What you propose is pure nonsense. The solution for communal problems must be solved within and by the community. First, your local community, then your national community, your regional community and, in the end, the global community. Which requires sharing. And if you don't want to share, you do not really belong to any community and should live on your own, solving alone all your problems and satisfying alone all your needs. Ready to try?...
If everybody does his part and contribute, then much of the problem of poverty will be alleviated. So we have to start with altruistic people like you. Give generously to the poor in India, Africa, and S America.

What's the matter? I thought you Socialists want to share.

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1159
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by SteveFoerster » Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:32 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sat Jan 06, 2018 1:40 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 7:54 pm

In other words, socialists don't want freedom, they want safety. I'm not saying safety is bad, but things should be called what they are.
Semantics.
You may dislike the definitions that the words you misuse have, but that doesn't make it "semantics" to correct you.
Can one be free without being safe? Or, in other words, is it worthwhile being "free" without being safe? I am free to do as I wish, I am free to choose the people who will rule over me but, in spite of that, I am without work, I am hungry, I can't get medical assistance, I can't afford sending my children to school, I am homeless...
You seriously believe that having people rule over you, however they come to be there, is part of "freedom"? One can argue it's a necessary evil, but either way, to be ruled over is the definition of unfree.
While it is conceivable that people may be safe but not free, that's not what socialism is striving for.
How sad it is that 100 million deaths later we're still hearing "But that wasn't real socialism!"
The ideal of libertarian socialists is conciliating safety with freedom. It is true that many so-called socialist regimes have given a very low priority to freedom, in the liberal sense of the word, but that must not always be the case. By giving preference to cooperatives and workers self management, libertarian socialists hope to socialize the economy without recourse to nationalization. And building democracy from the ground up - through local and regional bodies - may avoid democracy simply becoming a stage towards oligarchy.
"Libertarian socialism" is an oxymoron. Besides, you've shown that so long as they oppose the U.S., there's no regime so loathsome you can't find a kind word for it. That's one of the main reasons I don't believe that voluntary cooperatives and political decentralisation are what you or any other socialist really has in mind.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:11 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:32 am
Besides, you've shown that so long as they oppose the U.S., there's no regime so loathsome you can't find a kind word for it. That's one of the main reasons I don't believe that voluntary cooperatives and political decentralisation are what you or any other socialist really has in mind.
I don't follow your reasoning... Can you elaborate?...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1601
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by cassowary » Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:34 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:11 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:32 am
Besides, you've shown that so long as they oppose the U.S., there's no regime so loathsome you can't find a kind word for it. That's one of the main reasons I don't believe that voluntary cooperatives and political decentralisation are what you or any other socialist really has in mind.
I don't follow your reasoning... Can you elaborate?...
Judging how the left is opposing Trump's support for the Iranian protestors, constant praise for Cuba and support for Russia, we conclude that the left secretly loves authoritarian regimes. So we don't trust them when they present Socialism as something benign. It is sugar coating for a poison pill.

neverfail
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by neverfail » Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:13 pm

cassowary wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:34 pm

Judging how the left is opposing Trump's support for the Iranian protestors,....
What support has he given? He has only incited them!

Any well informed political leader interested in conducting real foreign policy (as distinct from grandstanding to the home crowd or egoist chest thumping) would have kept his mouth shut. Trump is not such a leader.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1601
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by cassowary » Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:10 pm

neverfail wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:13 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:34 pm

Judging how the left is opposing Trump's support for the Iranian protestors,....
What support has he given? He has only incited them!

Any well informed political leader interested in conducting real foreign policy (as distinct from grandstanding to the home crowd or egoist chest thumping) would have kept his mouth shut. Trump is not such a leader.
He has come out to say he supports their protests and affirms their right to peaceful protests. He also put Iran on notice that harsh reprisals on the Iranian protestors will be met with sanctions. This of course means they will be encouraged to protest some more. Does that amount to incitement?

Shutting his mouth is tantamount to supporting the authoritarians in charge in Iran. Why stand on the side of them who are funding terrorist groups? Only a leftist like oBUMa would do that. Somehow, the left ends up on the side of the worst regimes.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:20 am

cassowary wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:34 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:11 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:32 am
Besides, you've shown that so long as they oppose the U.S., there's no regime so loathsome you can't find a kind word for it. That's one of the main reasons I don't believe that voluntary cooperatives and political decentralisation are what you or any other socialist really has in mind.
I don't follow your reasoning... Can you elaborate?...
Judging how the left is opposing Trump's support for the Iranian protestors, constant praise for Cuba and support for Russia, we conclude that the left secretly loves authoritarian regimes. So we don't trust them when they present Socialism as something benign. It is sugar coating for a poison pill.
No. Rather the left wants to see the defeat of US imperialism and realize that Russia, China, North Korea and Iran are the tools to achieve such a defeat. The regimes in those countries are secundary and are not praised by the left.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1601
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by cassowary » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:55 am

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:20 am
cassowary wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:34 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:11 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:32 am
Besides, you've shown that so long as they oppose the U.S., there's no regime so loathsome you can't find a kind word for it. That's one of the main reasons I don't believe that voluntary cooperatives and political decentralisation are what you or any other socialist really has in mind.
I don't follow your reasoning... Can you elaborate?...
Judging how the left is opposing Trump's support for the Iranian protestors, constant praise for Cuba and support for Russia, we conclude that the left secretly loves authoritarian regimes. So we don't trust them when they present Socialism as something benign. It is sugar coating for a poison pill.
No. Rather the left wants to see the defeat of US imperialism and realize that Russia, China, North Korea and Iran are the tools to achieve such a defeat. The regimes in those countries are secundary and are not praised by the left.
In other words, you take the side of Russia, China, Iran and N Korea against the US in a confrontation. According to the human rights index, the US is free country. Those four countries are not free. See this link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices

Thanks for proving me right. Like most leftists, you are on the side of evil regimes.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:39 pm

cassowary wrote:
Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:55 am

In other words, you take the side of Russia, China, Iran and N Korea against the US in a confrontation. According to the human rights index, the US is free country. Those four countries are not free.

Thanks for proving me right. Like most leftists, you are on the side of evil regimes.
The only side I am on, is the side of Europe (and particularly Southern Europe). What I am against is US imperialism, and I hope Russia, China, North Korea and Iran will be the tools to end American hegemony. Their regimes are indifferent to me and are a problem only to the respective peoples.

Post Reply