College students furious after they’re tricked into rejecting socialist ideal

[Sakki]

Irrelevant to the exercise of the video. Stop fixating on the reward and consider the point it was trying to make which is the leftist view is you have to give up something to somebody else for the sake of fairness, regardless of how hard you worked for it.

Is there a difference? Regardless of how hard you work, you have to give up something for somebody else sake... state or boss/company owner, that is the only difference for majority of workers between left and right. Unless you work for yourself, your hard work makes the company owner rich and not you. My boss said me this after he bought his new Bentley "See that car? If you work really hard, i ll be able to buy more cars like this."

His work, forwarding the mail from customer, my work is getting it done. As reward i get around 5% of what they charge customer for my work (just for work, every other expenditure is charged extra).

[Zan15]

So you are saying a girl working at the McDonalds drive thru window should have as much influence as someone like Mark Zuckerburg or Warren Buffett?

dont know according to republicans and the last election and the electoral process....yes...yes they should.

wasn't this their excuse for supporting the electoral process in a trump win that someone in Idaho should have as much influence as someone in CA regardless that those folks in CA contribute far more to the economy and the country then those in Idaho.

can't have it both ways.


So funny that CA votes were "redistributed" and other states were given more weight per vote then CA.....very socialist idea huh?

[SupBrah]

Socialism: Sounds great, until you're the one footing the bill.

[Masark]

Socialism: Sounds great, until you're the one footing the bill.

Capitalism : Sounds great, until you're discarded in the quest for more money.

[Torto]

How does me saying people at the top have "too much" influence equate to me saying McDonalds drive-thru employees and CEO's should have equal influence?

Well what are you arguing for? Are you saying successful people have too much power and we should remove it? Are you saying lower class people should have more power?

[niil945]

If the point is to make a difference between democratic socialists and communist it is actually a good idea to use the term 'democratic socialists' not 'socialists' instead of incorrectly stating that socialism and communism only have a little overlap.

Tell that to the right wing nutjobs who refer to leftists who embrace the ideals of Bernie Sanders and prettymuch the majority of the democratic world as communists and socialists. That's where the conversation started. That's exactly what I mean about semantics. Nexx's response was, by context as I interpreted it, that socialism (small S) as espoused by the referenced college students is not remotely comparable to communism and vice versa. And that's 100% an accurate statement. And then you went off on "Socialism" and ran with it, completely outside the context of the statement that initiated that tangent.

- - - Updated - - -

And that really burns you guys up.

This whole thread is priceless. Watching all the progressive liberal lefties contort themselves by trying to explain away the obvious hypocrisy by arguing over synonyms, equivalency and analogies make this whole thread pure gold. You guys can obfuscate all you want, the message in the video in very clear. Don't stress about it too much though, your bubble wrapped world view would have been shattered once you entered the real world anyway.

Does it? I laugh at the idiocy of it, but it doesn't make me angry. Why would I be angry that people who make such claims are demonstrating that they're morons? I mean, hell, you followed it up with a statement that demonstrates that you do believe that the comparison is valid. As to your claim that my bubble wrapped world view will be shattered when I enter the real world, when does that happen? Should it have happened when I served in the army as military police over 2 decades ago? What about when I moved from rural PA to New York City for my first job after college? How about when I picked up and moved solo across the country to Seattle for a while? Or was it supposed to be in my 30's when I moved to Florida? How about now that I've moved out of the country temporarily while my fiance finishes med school and I'm just enjoying island life as I keep her company? Hell, I'm over 40, when is the real world supposed to hit me? Wait, you've demonstrated you're a moron by believing that the comparison is valid so nevermind. You're just pissing in the wind lol

- - - Updated - - -

The nations you mention are social democrats not democratic socialists. There is a big difference between the two.

Yep, and that's what the conversation started over, social democrats being called socialists by right wing lunatics who are really bad at logic.

[Theinquisition]

Oh Tony. This is akin to someone bringing a snowball into Congress as a proof there's no global warming. It's not understanding the difference between weather and climate.

Grades are not a commodity.

Also we already apply socialist principles to schooling...it's called public education. Or you think poor children shouldn't receive an education? We also apply another liberal tho not necessarily socialist principle called affirmative action.

This is one of those situations where you think you have a gottcha...but mostly because you don't understand what is happening...while in reality it's just an evidence of ignorance on behalf of the creator...and the poster.

I definitely enjoy the butthurt from the leftists on this page, thats more than enough satisfaction for me.

[Orange Joe]

I definitely enjoy the butthurt from the leftists on this page, thats more than enough satisfaction for me.

So just to clarify. If someone posts about something they don't like they are butthurt? But when you post about something you don't like you are?

[Theinquisition]

So just to clarify. If someone posts about something they don't like they are butthurt? But when you post about something you don't like you are?

I guess I enjoy the hate poured out on me for simply linking something some don't like...thats is 90% of what I enjoy about the forums here. To know that some leftists were irritated for a portion of their day brings a slight smile to my day.

[Travis B]

I definitely enjoy the butthurt from the leftists on this page, thats more than enough satisfaction for me.

People showing you how your analogy makes absolutely no sense = butthurt?

[Orange Joe]

I guess I enjoy the hate poured out on me for simply linking something some don't like...thats is 90% of what I enjoy about the forums here. To know that some leftists were irritated for a portion of their day brings a slight smile to my day.

Hate? What hate? People correcting you isn't hate.


Can you even quote more then 3 people insulting you in this thread?

[nanook12]

It's about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Everyone should get the opportunity to go to college, but it's all on you when you get there.

[s_bushido]

So just to clarify. If someone posts about something they don't like they are butthurt? But when you post about something you don't like you are?

When it has been pointed to him out over and over again that he doesn't have the slightest clue about the subject he's constantly maligning, what choice does he have but to pretend it's everyone else with the emotional investment?

[Travis B]

When it has been pointed to him out over and over again that he doesn't have the slightest clue about the subject he's constantly maligning, what choice does he have but to pretend it's everyone else with the emotional investment?

He can't face reality so he creates his own alternative reality with alternative facts. Sad!

[stomination]

Tell that to the right wing nutjobs who refer to leftists who embrace the ideals of Bernie Sanders and prettymuch the majority of the democratic world as communists and socialists. That's where the conversation started. That's exactly what I mean about semantics. Nexx's response was, by context as I interpreted it, that socialism (small S) as espoused by the referenced college students is not remotely comparable to communism and vice versa. And that's 100% an accurate statement. And then you went off on "Socialism" and ran with it, completely outside the context of the statement that initiated that tangent.

The Left also started that rhetoric when Hillary was having problems getting him out of the race.

- - - Updated - - -

dont know according to republicans and the last election and the electoral process....yes...yes they should.

wasn't this their excuse for supporting the electoral process in a trump win that someone in Idaho should have as much influence as someone in CA regardless that those folks in CA contribute far more to the economy and the country then those in Idaho.

can't have it both ways.


So funny that CA votes were "redistributed" and other states were given more weight per vote then CA.....very socialist idea huh?

The only thing socialist about it was they allowed us to vote. They originally was going to let congress and governors vote only.

[Orange Joe]

The only thing socialist about it was they allowed us to vote. They originally was going to let congress and governors vote only.

He is talking about how the EC "distributes" votes

[stomination]

He is talking about how the EC "distributes" votes

You mean that thing where they give out votes based on a census every so many years? Which was decided way back when.

[Masark]

You mean that thing where they give out votes based on a census every so many years? Which was decided way back when.

The thing where certain states get more votes than their populations justify.

[Noradin]

Hell, that alone was the whole point of science fiction and fantasy genre. To reexamine ideas without their baggage attached to them. In that respect, question still stands, how can you argue for more redistribution of wealth while at the same time object to redistribution of grades. All while providing the same argument against redistribution of grades, that people use against redistribution of wealth.

Welath is analogus to knowledge, not to grades, and I'm in favour of the redistribution of knowledge.
Due to the nature of knowledge in that sharing it means all parties get it that means the knowledgeable should teach, not just use their knowledge for their own gain, only.
Both wealth and knowledge are things that rely on redistribution, wealth even more so than knowledge, because money is meaningless if you cannot transfer it. Grades on the other hand are something that relies on themselves not being transferable or they lose all meaning. It is their most intrinisc property.
The attempt to make an analogy of the two (wealth and grade) in the way the example did shows a horrific lack of knowledge (or a disregard) of the two concepts. So much so, that one has to ask how come they apparently could become students at all or if there is something else going on that prevented otherwise capable human beings from learning about these two basic concepts? did they never get any grades before or is the system so corrupt those grades were handled like an substitute for money?

- - - Updated - - -

The entire system of grades falls apart if you "redistribute" them. It literally won't even work anymore. You might as well not have a grading system, because the second you redistribute the grade from one person to another, it loses all meaning and purpose.
Money, on the other hands, is useful regardless of who acquired it, or how. It's use is not dependent on someone personally earning it. It's value is divorced from the person who possess it.

Worse, the most important property of money is being transferable, the most important one of grades is being untransferable.
That means they logically cannot behave the same regarding redistribution--which is a form of transfer--and thus logically one cannot be used as analogy for the other in regards of redistribution.
They do not share the necessary property, they are opposites regarding that necessary property.
There is literally no worse analogy you could come up with. (Only ones that are just as bad at most.)

[Macaquerie]

This video does give some indicate as to how conservatives see wealth though - not as something that should be exchanged and spent for mutual benefit, but as a measure of status that is valuable mainly because it makes you better than other people. Thing is, in a capitalist system, money isn't supposed to bring you power, influence, or respect, it's just a medium of exchange that makes it more convenient to trade with others, that's it. There is this persistent fantasy among certain right wing types that somehow regurgitating corporatist dogma will allow them to become modern day aristocrats of a sort, but sad to say, even the most privileged family dynasties are lucky to last three generations without blowing it, it's just human nature.