Its hilarious to see people so ignorant of the world around them that they screech about socialism while currently enjoying its benefits.
Whichever one is less coercive at any given point in time.
Civic nationalism all the way baby! There simply is no other ideology that comes close.
Living in a Scandinavian country I am already blessed!
Last edited by Aurgjelme; 2020-03-02 at 05:18 PM.
Last edited by PC2; 2020-03-02 at 05:21 PM.
"Nationalism" doesn't mean "a nation exists", dude. Stop misusing words.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/nationalism
Nationalism, ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.
It isn't "supporting your country's existence". There's no contradiction in the two factors you described. The "nation of Canada" is not an iteration of nationalist sentiments, and the provision of welfare is not against those national interests.
Edit: I'll also link SMBC's rundown of the distinction between "patriotism" and "nationalism", since the two words are not synonyms; https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/an...nt-distinction
Last edited by Endus; 2020-03-02 at 05:46 PM.
They can be against complete socialism. They can say they don't want to be like Venezuela, while still pushing their own form of socialism. But, the second you get the government involved to control the means of production, then you are sliding down that scale of socialism. We've come to accept that socialism is more of a sliding scale, and not the absolute last stop before communism. Otherwise, the word is rather meaningless in its current usage... because so very few people would be actual socialists.
Restricting the movement of labour & capital =/= socialism. You'd have to redefine "socialism" to mean, near as damnit, "any kind of government whatsoever*", which is a retarded definition.
*Lest you think I'm exaggerating, prison & taxes are both restrictions on the mobility of labour & capital respectively. Compulsory schooling, even if the only one doing the compelling is the parent, is a restriction on labour mobility too, come to think of it.
Nice to see that some other people get it.
Still not tired of winning.
It's particularly silly when even Adam Smith recognized that you'd need to restrict the movement of capital and the actions of producers, in protecting the rights of consumers. That literally is capitalist theory, right from the start; the anarcho-capitalism nonsense is nationalist mercantilism, without even the structure of nationalism. It celebrates and fosters everything capitalism was meant to fix.
Still not tired of winning.
These two are not related but answer is simple - nationalism.
When Germans tried to genocide us it was nationalism that helped us survive.
On the other hand german national socialism and then soviet socialism ruined our country.
Democratic Socialist Convention : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPLQNUVmq3o