Yeah, the rarely seen honorable capitalist, as rare as a white rhino. A millionaire or billionaire that earned their wealth by completely fair means. Stock exchanges, which produce nothing but control the price of all goods and services. Capitalism is base and vile I don't disrespect it, I loathe it.
Do you approve of such characters from William Randolph Hearst to Rupert Murdoch or influential families that were built on monies made from criminality, such as the bootlegging Kennedy's or fraudsters such as Trump? — universeness

Being rich isn't genocide, genius. Snap out of it.

Putin is an unelected totalitarian dictator and a theist, Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot were also totalitarian dictators. As is Kim jung un, as was Stalin. Hitler was a fascist obsessed with the theosophic occult. He believed in the supernatural and his soldgers swore allegiance to god and Adolf Hitler and on the list goes. You ascribe the deaths they caused to socialism? Utter nonsense! — universeness

Most of them gained power through democratic channels. No, I ascribe it to state-socialism, which is a fact.

Again, right back at you. Panto chat is boring. You conflate and you come to wrong conclusions. You cant see a difference between totalitarianism and socialism. Using a label does not mean you are such. Is a pedo priest a Christian because they use the label? is a King divine because he demands you accept the label? I have already told you that one must demonstrate socialism if you use the label. If you don't then you are not socialist. None of the vile killer groups you mention are socialist. — universeness

That's right, they're state-socialist, aren't reading what I say silly? The labels they give themselves matter. When's the last time you saw the label Capitalist, I mean as a loudly professed ideology with principles and strictures, committing genocide? This isn't an argument you're gonna get away with. If you want to chat with me about this, I want to see some denunciations, and not this half-assed "that wasn't socialism" shit you lefties have been spouting for 50 years. That's old and worn. Yes, it was, it was what socialism looks like when administered by the state, that's why they all look the same.

If by forced socialism you mean one-party rule or totalitarianism then we agree. Socialism is by the democratic consent of the majority or else it is not socialism! There can never be forced socialism as a realpolitik. — universeness

OKAY, there we go! That's more like it. You keep that mentality right there, and there's hope for you. It is essential that you differentiate the two forever, unlike most of your modern brethren, although I have met a few whom I've admired very much. The non-Realpolitik part, is in fucking dispensible. As in, the moment it enters the equation, you have an anti-human philosophy. Just like most philosophies with force as a value.

I favour global socialism. — universeness

My friend..... (sigh)... This sentence and the statement above it are incompatible. Global socialism will require you to violate the consciousness of those who do not wish to participate in good faith. You'll get there, man. I know you will, you're a smart guy with good intentions. But, man, this kind of desire in the best of hands has proven disasterous. You have to understand that socialism must be voluntary. I swear to you, you will all gain followers faster than any Randian vision ever dreamed of. Have you explored the libertarian socialist vision?

As I said before, blah blah blah, white noise, I am sure like most people, including me, it sounds good when you read such words back to yourself. As Rabbie Burns said:

"O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!" — universeness

hehahahe! You're alright, man.

Being rich isn't genocide, genius. Snap out of it — Garrett Travers

No it's not, but genocide is normally perpetrated by brutalised, traumatised, often 'brain dead' soldiers, under orders from scared institutionalised officers in a scared and divided hierarchy which answers to an unelected political elite. Who stole power and are VERY VERY RICH!
But thanks for calling me a genius. I think you are a genius too Garrett, in exactly the same way.

Most of them gained power through democratic channels. No, I ascribe it to state-socialism, which is a fact. — Garrett Travers

Yeah, Putin, who was appointed or 'inherited' his title from the moronic Boris Yeltsin. Any democratic channels you think were involved are of your imagination. These people gain power in the same way the leaders of the Mafia gain power or the same way old tribal leaders gained power. Its gangsta rools mate. Not democratic ones. Perhaps you need to 'snap out of it.'

That's right, they're state-socialist — Garrett Travers

Size does matter but not if true socialism is applied, which it never has been, including the time of Epicurus as true socialism has very little use for a 'leader of most significance.'

The labels they give themselves matter. — Garrett Travers

Of course they do, especially when they are totally false!

When's the last time you saw the label Capitalist, I mean as a loudly professed ideology with principles and strictures, committing genocide? — Garrett Travers

You need to be able to interpret such labels as 'Chinese chairman of the communist party' as the true labels 'Rich, powerful, Capitalist with genocidal tendencies.' or 'Socialist/communist leader of Mother Russia' or 'Greatest at everything, Capitalist leader of the FREE WORLD, Donald Trump' as in Truth
'Lunatic in voted in by the members of an asylum who has serious genocidal potential.'
You are looking behind the wrong curtains!

This isn't an argument you're gonna get away with. If you want to chat with me about this, I want to see some denunciations, and not this half-assed "that wasn't socialism" shit you lefties have been spouting for 50 years. That's old and worn. Yes, it was, it was what socialism looks like when administered by the state, that's why they all look the same. — Garrett Travers

I'm sorry I can't participate in accordance with your rules. It's unfortunate you find the truth 'half-assed' and are upset by how long true socialists have been speaking truth. I can spend my whole life forcing everyone under my power to accept that they see three lights. I can call myself socialist while I do this or any other label which is popular amongst 'the people.' Saviour/Messiah/hero/chosen one/Trusted Philosopher/Ethical. It does not matter. Some of the people will fight on and tell the truth! There are only two lights. Real socialists will always say 'there are two lights, now let's live by truly socialist/humanist politics and create checks and balances to root out the nefarious.'

OKAY, there we go! That's more like it. You keep that mentality right there, and there's hope for you. It is essential that you differentiate the two forever, unlike most of your modern brethren, although I have met a few whom I've admired very much. The non-Realpolitik part, is in fucking dispensible. As in, the moment it enters the equation, you have an anti-human philosophy. Just like most philosophies with force as a value — Garrett Travers

I don't get the 'surprise' your text above exclaims. The position I describe is fundamental in true socialism. It's just that you have been infected by American propaganda, regarding socialism. I have no brethren that would dilute true socialism. Flexibility and case by case is the Realpolitik of true socialism and you must be able to leave, (in the true Epicurean sense, if you prefer) without consequence. We will however secure by hand or by brain to protect our people. So force is a socialist tool of defense only, never attack, never to impose our politics on any outside group, such an act would mean disconnection to our socialism.

My friend..... (sigh)... This sentence and the statement above it are incompatible. Global socialism will require you to violate the consciousness of those who do not wish to participate in good faith. — Garrett Travers

Now who's not reading who's words carefully Garrett?
I carefully said I FAVOUR IT as I think it is a benevolent system for all. I cannot impose it on others without consent, I would not be a socialist if I did so. That's the main difference between true socialism and dictatorial politics. I AM AGAINST DICTATORIAL POLITICS. If you can hear me that I ask you to stop comparing MY socialism with maniac totalitarians.

You have to understand that socialism must be voluntary — Garrett Travers

aarrrrrgggghhhh! I know!! I have been saying so all my political life.
I cannot impose my politics on anyone but I ask you to accept the complexity of getting the balance correct between being fair on a case by case basis with a dissenting voice whilst maintaining the main tenets of socialism and protecting the well-being of the majority of the people involved. That is the Realpolitik and it's difficult but as true socialist, we will ever strive towards achieving it. A good ethics philosopher could help by resisting the temptation or instinct to call us 'evil.'

Have you explored the libertarian socialist vision? — Garrett Travers

I will listen to any labeled concept which will progress true socialism but I am not particularly familiar with the label combination you offer above.

hehahahe! You're alright, man. — Garrett Travers

In Truth, I like you to Garrett. Your knowledge and projections of philosophy remain very strong and I do feel that your intentions towards others are benevolent. I don't mind spats, even heated ones, especially if the final result is an improved understanding between both parties. Even if that improvement is tenuous and small, it's still progress for all involved.

No it's not, but genocide is normally perpetrated by brutalised, traumatised, often 'brain dead' soldiers, under orders from scared institutionalised officers in a scared and divided hierarchy which answers to an unelected political elite. Who stole power and are VERY VERY RICH!
But thanks for calling me a genius. I think you are a genius too Garrett, in exactly the same way. — universeness

This is true. 100%

Yeah, Putin, who was appointed or 'inherited' his title from the moronic Boris Yeltsin. Any democratic channels you think were involved are of your imagination. These people gain power in the same way the leaders of the Mafia gain power or the same way old tribal leaders gained power. Its gangsta rools mate. Not democratic ones. Perhaps you need to 'snap out of it.' — universeness

You misunderstand, those channels don't save the country from tyrants. It is specifically the democratic channels that were manipulated to produce this outcome.

Size does matter but not if true socialism is applied, which it never has been, including the time of Epicurus as true socialism has very little use for a 'leader of most significance.' — universeness

Which is why you and your people have work to do to make it tenable. As it has been known is disasterous.

You need to be able to interpret such labels as 'Chinese chairman of the communist party' as the true labels 'Rich, powerful, Capitalist with genocidal tendencies.' or 'Socialist/communist leader of Mother Russia' or 'Greatest at everything, Capitalist leader of the FREE WORLD, Donald Trump' as in Truth
'Lunatic in voted in by the members of an asylum who has serious genocidal potential.'
You are looking behind the wrong curtains! — universeness

I'm just seeing Dirigists, pal. The reason I brought that up is because socialism is an actual ideology, capitalism is just a model of private property. That's why they use the banner.

Of course they do, especially when they are totally false! — universeness

This still remains to be shown by anybody.

Real socialists will always say 'there are two lights, now let's live by truly socialist/humanist politics and create checks and balances to root out the nefarious.' — universeness

It's just, nobody calling themselves socialist have done this, they normally just declared everyone nefarious and killed them. That's kind of the issue.

aarrrrrgggghhhh! I know!! I have been saying so all my political life.
I cannot impose my politics on anyone but I ask you to accept the complexity of getting the balance correct between being fair on a case by case basis with a dissenting voice whilst maintaining the main tenets of socialism and protecting the well-being of the majority of the people involved. That is the Realpolitik and it's difficult but as true socialist, we will ever strive towards achieving it. A good ethics philosopher could help by resisting the temptation or instinct to call us 'evil.' — universeness

OH, then we're allies. Welcome aboard, mate. Glad to have you here.

In Truth, I like you to Garrett. Your knowledge and projections of philosophy remain very strong and I do feel that your intentions towards others are benevolent. I don't mind spats, even heated ones, especially if the final result is an improved understanding between both parties. Even if that improvement is tenuous and small, it's still progress for all involved. — universeness

Yeah, I mean if the above statements are your disposition, we're on board 100%. That's straight up the key to socialst success, and it's crazy because it's been right there in front of all them, glaring them in the face. I'm sorry your predecessors have tainted the word, it isn't fair to you all in the modern world. But, we'll all make it through if this above is the vision.

You misunderstand, those channels don't save the country from tyrants. It is specifically the democratic channels that were manipulated to produce this outcome — Garrett Travers

If I misunderstood then we fundamentally agree but you blame 'manipulated democratic channels,' for being manipulated. Ok I accept and I have stated over and over again that true socialism will require powerful checks and balances so that such manipulations by nefarious individuals/groups cannot happen. But you are way off the mark when you blame socialism and democracy by those who misuse
these labels. Do you blame the doctrine of Christianity or the god fable for the actions of paedo priests?
I don't. Politics are not evil, people do evil things in the name of all sorts of 'labels of convenience.'
Your deadliest enemy can appear wearing the exact same ethics as you espouse. You know what intrigue is about. Stop blaming good people for the past/current evil acts of nefarious individuals because they appear the same as the good people. Watch what they do, not what they promise to do. You know this stuff!

Which is why you and your people have work to do to make it tenable. As it has been known is disasterous — Garrett Travers

Yes, this is the true socialist responsibility. If true socialists can never demonstrate that we can be trusted to do what we say we will do, when a population gives us consent at the ballot box, to do so, then people like you and me will shout 'foul' very loudly and the checks and balances must be activated.
There are groups like 'momentum' in the UK who are trying to establish 'progressive alliances,' which may well relate to your label of 'Libertarian socialist vision.' They are trying to get people from any walk of politics to find common ground, to work together, use tactical voting, any techniques that will always stop extreme, nefarious, cult of personality type intentions from gaining political power. This is a start to the kind of checks and balances we need. We have to have worked out and have established very powerful checks and balances before we ever make a bid for power through the consent of a majority. We must have layers of protection. People groups who scrutinise what those in authority do and have the power to stop an unjust act or policy or law and can demand that authority must seek the consent of the majority on a particular issue. We cannot try for power until we can be easily removed if we don't do what we said we would do in the time we said we would do it. If there are legitimate reasons why we can't do it then we must explain and offer those we represent a list of alternatives/actions that they can choose from. This must always include removal from power, at any time. No guaranteed time frame.
The monitor groups will decide when we need to seek renewed consent. The monitor groups must also be scrutinised. It sounds complicated, but we don't want to repeat past mistakes so we have to get it right, if we can't then we can't ask for power. That's the prime directive.
Progress may be slow but it will be by consent and not by force.

It's just, nobody calling themselves socialist have done this, they normally just declared everyone nefarious and killed them. That's kind of the issue — Garrett Travers

Yes they have, so many good people have tried and died trying. The rich and powerful narcissistic bas***** are not a weak force, they have proved that in history time and time again and continue to do so. They will use all the power they have to stop socialists like me. I would get a bullet in the head as soon as I was recognised. They will use their money and influence to divide and conquer, to infiltrate our groups and destroy them from within. They have already got good people like you calling everything we try to do 'evil' because the say 'look its the loony left again,' or they will show you pretty shiny objects to distract you or they will get you all tied up in celebrity worship and show you reality tv shows to distract you, while they consolidate their power bases and hoard wealth, materials, power.
This is an incredibly tough, ruthless enemy. It's very hard for true socialists to defeat them as its hard to be as ruthless as them and sometimes there is no other way to stop them. But we keep trying, we always have since we came out of the wilds, we have been slaughtered by the million. 10,000 years of tears!

Yeah, I mean if the above statements are your disposition, we're on board 100%. That's straight up the key to socialst success, and it's crazy because it's been right there in front of all them, glaring them in the face. I'm sorry your predecessors have tainted the word, it isn't fair to you all in the modern world. But, we'll all make it through if this above is the vision. — Garrett Travers

Thanks, Garrett, I really appreciate your willingness to give people like me the benefit of the doubt.
If we cant unite then the bas***** will keep winning! 10,000 years of tears is enough. We must all do better. I have no particular need for the label socialist if it is just too damaged by the lies of others.
We will make new labels if we really need to but there is real power behind the socialism label.
I would like to clean it through demonstration of the good politics it can represent or at least join those who are trying to do so.

Let's try to maintain out unity brother/comrade/fellow earthing.
In union and in fellowship!

I will try that penultimate line again.

Let's try to maintain our unity brother/comrade/fellow Earthling

If I misunderstood then we fundamentally agree but you blame 'manipulated democratic channels,' for being manipulated. Ok I accept and I have stated over and over again that true socialism will require powerful checks and balances so that such manipulations by nefarious individuals/groups cannot happen. But you are way off the mark when you blame socialism and democracy by those who misuse
these labels. Do you blame the doctrine of Christianity or the god fable for the actions of paedo priests?
I don't. Politics are not evil, people do evil things in the name of all sorts of 'labels of convenience.'
Your deadliest enemy can appear wearing the exact same ethics as you espouse. You know what intrigue is about. Stop blaming good people for the past/current evil acts of nefarious individuals because they appear the same as the good people. Watch what they do, not what they promise to do. You know this stuff! — universeness

These are excellent points. You're right. It's something I let my emotions cloud sometimes. I'm not emotional about a lot, but I am in regards to the human mind being raped. Putin has started attacking civilian areas in Ukraine. The shit makes me tremble with fury. And I mean that to say quite a bit, nothing does this sort of thing to me. I'll try to take this into consideration. It's a bit difficult for me to detach Putin, and people like him, from politics altogether.

But we keep trying, we always have since we came out of the wilds, we have been slaughtered by the million. 10,000 years of tears! — universeness

Yeah, I'm with you, brother. I know it better than most I've met. I'm glad you know it too.

Thanks, Garrett, I really appreciate your willingness to give people like me the benefit of the doubt.
If we cant unite then the bas***** will keep winning! 10,000 years of tears is enough. We must all do better. I have no particular need for the label socialist if it is just too damaged by the lies of others.
We will make new labels if we really need to but there is real power behind the socialism label.
I would like to clean it through demonstration of the good politics it can represent or at least join those who are trying to do so.

Let's try to maintain out unity brother/comrade/fellow earthing.
In union and in fellowship! — universeness

You have an ally in me, friend. I'm an Epicurean, a Neuroethicist, an Objectivist, a philosopher, and a comrade besides. I'll have you know the most intelligent human I ever met was a Libertarian Socialist who helped me see the things we've discussed here. He helped me understand that the only path forward was the one that valued the human at its core, no matter the belief structure someone had adopted. He didn't know it quite like I do, but he could feel it. I love humanity, comrade. We'll fix it together, all of us.

:strong: :grin: :up: :clap: :clap: :clap: :victory:

All power to the people of the Ukraine! :heart:

Chat to ya, out on the treads Garrett!