A Conversation with a Liberal

This was a very exhausting three day exchange on Facebook with a person who you think would be intelligent considering she is attending a University. Yet this was not the case.

The lady in question visited my site and saw that I was in full support of abolishing the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. She then started a conversation that went off on a totally different direction. The conversation abruptly ended when I cornered her by asking her to Defend her argument on why Socialism and Liberalism works better than a Free Market.

The full conversation is below. For fun her comments are in blue to represent her political party, and mine and two other people who joined the debate are in red. It is a long read, but well worth it. Read how she thinks about how the world works, and some examples she gives. It was an open debate...

(CSU Pueblo) wrote
Why do you want to abolish the 17th Amendment?

Before it was put in place, Senators were chosen (elected) by the members of the Individual State Governments. (State House and State Senate).
The US Senators were the representatives of the State to the Federal Government. The 17th, took power away from the States, giving the vote to the people. The people already have Representation in DC, The US House (Congress). Now, as an example, my home state, Georgia has no Representation in DC, but Germany, Russia, South Africa does-- in the form of Ambassadors---
US Senators were originally tasked to promote their States in DC, by passing on information from the State Representatives. This was a check and balance system. If the people did not like the Senator, then they would blame the State Representatives for voting for him or her to Represent the? State. The people then had power of the vote to remove that Local State official, keeping the State in check.

The people only need one part of Congress to represent them, not two. I am a strong supporter of states Rights. A Repeal of the 17th will do that, and it will put the Federal Government in check, to let them know that they serve at the please of the States, and the States serve at the pleasure of the people. This is how the Founding Fathers wanted it to be, to guarantee and Republic free of Government control.

The 16th and 17th, were passed around the same time. It was the start of the power grab that continues to this day.

I hope this answered your question.

(CSU Pueblo) wrote

I am aware of the function of the 17th Amendment. I just find it interesting that you would support a change that would make the federal government further removed from the control of individual citizens. As far as citizens having "enough representation in DC," I don't believe I necessarily agree. The Senate wields considerable power, while the House of Representatives largely gets very little accomplished. As one of my lab leaders from the University of Kansas debate camp put it, "The difference between the Senate and the House is the difference between chicken salad and chicken shit." Not to be crude or anything, but this metaphor pretty accurately depicts how policies are moved and shaped by the Senate while the House provides a relatively ineffective outlet for citizens' representation. I am also curious to know how Georgia is somehow represented by neither Senators nor Representatives at the federal level.

The Senate is supposed to represent the state and its interests. Now the Senators represent themselves...Then again so does Congress considering that no one pays attention any more.
I like your metaphor by the way...LOL
I am a strict Constitutionalist. I like the way the Founding Fathers had things set up, and to have a group of Socialists change it, says a lot about how they truly feel about our Republic.
They never did care about individualism or freedom...It's all about power.

(CSU Pueblo) wrote

I'm going to change the subject a little bit here.
Who were the "socialists" that are changing it? Why is "socialism" suddenly demonized?

You’re kidding right.

Why is it demonized?

Do you consider yourself an individualist? You do the right things in life. You work hard, go to school, raise a family, and build your American Dream?

If yes, then Socialism is everything you are against. Socialism is the philosophy of non-self-achievement. They get everything from someone else, and don't bother to earn it themselves. It sounds good when you talk about how everyone can be equal, but it is impossible to achieve. You harm others, by demanding that this equality happen. I'm not rich, but I'll be damned if someone takes from me to give to someone else. If I want to give of my own free will, then I will do so, and I do from time to time.
Socialism in Government is a method of power to collect the dumb-masses to your side by punishing the achievers to meet your inward goals.
Look at the examples of Socialist Governments both past and present.
Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Communist Russia, China, North Korea, and many Middle Eastern and South American nations.
I end with this enlightened quote:

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. -- Sir Winston Churchill

(CSU Pueblo) wrote

Oh goodness. I was not kidding, actually. I think this topic is worth examination because people have a very broad misconception of socialism.

I am not really in the mood to argue about all this, but I will just say that there is NO SUCH THING as the American Dream. It doesn't exist, at least, not for people who are on the wrong end of many American policies.

The American Dream is what you make of it. I'm building my dream by working hard and not using anyone to do it for me. Some peoples dream is to suck the success of achievers such as those who accept entitlements. If a person can’t do it himself or herself then what good are they? Under the current policies of the Government under Obama, I am at the wrong end, and the entitled are. That is not going to stop me.

Socialism has never worked. Every time it has been tried, it has died.
Let it go peacefully, and stop digging it up.
It does not work.
Those who benefit from it are sucking it away from those who achieve on their own. They are leaches to society. Their is the rare case where they truly need help, thus you have churches, Red Cross, United Way and many others who will help.
Look at New Orleans after Katrina.
The achievers new better and left. The leaches stayed behind.
Government contact was severed for days, and the leaches had no idea how to fend for themselves because they had been sucking on the Government Tit so long. New Orleans is what happens in a Socialist Society. Almost four years later, there are still leaches living in trailers.
Do you truly mean to tell me that in four years they could not find a job and start their lives again?
No...A leach is a leach, and it can only do one thing. Suck the life out of others to survive. Government is the blood bank.

(CSU Pueblo) wrote

You have chosen to focus on some people who take advantage of some government systems and you are applying this to encompass anyone who is unemployed. This is a logical fallacy, sir, and not to mention highly insensitive.

This doesn't have anything to do with socialism. This has to do with how you're choosing to interpret government assistance to people in need. You're applying it in such a way that it will fit your narrow paradigm.

Calling someone a "leach" is not only offensive, but also a misnomer for some people in the system who genuinely need help. I hope that you consider choosing to empathize and look at people who might be less privileged. You should also keep in mind that not every person out there is trying to find some way to take advantage of the government for their entire lives.

For you to truly make an accurate assessment, you should consider how the entire system works together through privilege and oppression to keep people on welfare, food stamps, etc. It's not as simple as you think, sir.

The one problem with Socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people’s money---Margaret Thatcher.

I would like you to defend your argument.
Tell me why Socialism is so good.
Also, tell my where in the History of the World since Socialism was created, where it has ever worked, and maintained itself without taking away the freedoms and individuality of others?
Take your time...

(CSU Pueblo) wrote

Western Europe. While not purely socialist, they have a pretty awesome way of running things.

--English and European citizens who can-- fly to the United States for Medical treatment.
--Six months wait for non-threatening medical treatment.
---Taxes are over 50% of incomes.
--Triple the costs for all products you purchase there, versus here.
--$500 pound tax to have cable TV, plus the monthly bill.
--Cost of living is over the roof, and they pay
--$8.00 + a gallon for gas.
--Since opening borders, European crimes have gone up 10 fold.
--Italy was so mad with the EU that they are thinking about returning to the ---Lira, and leaving the EU.
--Unions control everything.
--Massive inflation.
--Creation of the Nazi and Fascist parties in the 1930's
--Neville Chamberlin
--People who have not done any crimes banned from the country because of what they say.
--Loss of Sovereignty

That is a working Socialist system…It is ready to collapse. The Average Socialist system does not last very long before it goes under. Nazi’s and Fascists lasted under 15 years… (The war hastened their demise.) Russia had a lot of money, but finally ran out.
China is being forced to use Capitalist principals to survive. They adopted them in the 1970’s.

I am still waiting for you to defend your argument.
Tell me why it is good. Moreover, if it could work without stealing other peoples money.
Remember, the Soviet Union did not fail because of Ronald Reagan. They collapsed because since 1917, they had been using the wealth of the Romanov Family to sustain it. It took 75 years, but they finally ran out, and the Government collapsed.

Tell me why in your argument that Socialism works better than the free market?


A THIRD PERSON JOINS THE CONVERSATION:

Miami Guy:

I agree with “The Fourth Republic”.

Want to hear it with the words of someone of Power over there? Listen to Daniel Hannan talk about it.

YouTube: Daniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94lW6Y4tBXs


Since March 24, 2009, this video has 2.3 million views, 5/5 rating and 14,447 comments... Obama needs to view this speech, as Obama is mirroring much of what they have already done and it did not work for them... why would it work for us?
While you are at it, watch the rest of his videos. (Click the DanHannanMEP name/link for the rest of his uploaded videos)

I like this one also.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRKEfgaR0ak

In addition, this one is him speaking to the American people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PixlAX-ubvo

The huge damning flaw with Socialism is it requires a huge central Gov't... People are people, and power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Look at where we all are if you want any proof.

Yet you have failed to provide examples of working socialism that would make people say "Hmm... This just may be a good idea!" So far, you are all talk. We are at LEAST making efforts to prove a point... experts we are not. So why don't you use the gained time of not contradicting us... and actually prove your point? Where... in this world, aka REALITY and not your imagination... does Socialism work better than how America works? (Or did until recently).

The more Gov't gets involved the more inefficient things become, less in touch with the common man they become, the more money is wasted, etc.. Etc... Etc... ETC... Is this why so much of the world comes to America instead of those Socialist countries, to have the "Socialist dream"?

The problem with Liberals is they "feel" instead of "think" and they want to feel good about themselves... they want to feel morally and intellectually superior to others based on their good deeds to prove how "evolved" they are. "If we leave the Middle East than the bad men won't bother us..." (Even though, last I had heard... they have sworn an oath of a holy war to kill all Jews and non-Muslims...)
Poor people do not start companies and hire people to create jobs... guess who does? People with more money than the usual person might. Then, those people who work save money... to retire, or maybe start their own businesses... and the cycle progresses in that manner. This is what has allowed America to be the envy of the world for so very long... not Socialism. Competition breeds innovation. Gov't controlled monopolies breed stagnation and suffocate innovation, they spread insanely high taxes and tariffs to feed the machine in a vicious cycle that will never end.

You can say what you want, think what you want... Maybe go live in one of those socialist countries and see if you like it... Nevertheless, really, if you do not get it by now... you never will until socialism implodes in on itself from trying to give too much to too many and suffocates itself to death in its own excrement. None of us are dumb enough to want to move somewhere else when everyone else is trying to move here. We kindly ask you to keep from bringing it to us.

The IRS tax code is over 3 million words long... and is changed frequently... and you may have heard on the news how many politicians are having tax problems. Even the IRS itself has trouble with all those rules.

That is what Big Gov't will get you, where as the rest of us would rather have the Fair or Flat tax. That is another difference between the two systems. One suffocates its businesses and people in taxes the other makes lighter and easier taxes which promotes business growth and consumer spending because consumers ACTUALLY HAVE MONEY TO SPEND. Which is exactly what we need, people spending money... NOT the Gov't spending our money for us. That is how we should be digging ourselves out of the hole we are in... Gov't spending is digging down deeper into the problem, not out. However, the Gov't is choking businesses and they are having to lay people off increasing unemployment rates and decreasing consumer spending... a vicious cycle.

Sorry, just had to get that last point out... bedtime now, I work nights but I stayed up later than usual.


(CSU Pueblo) wrote

I don't even know where to start. Your examples show correlations but no causalities when it comes to socialism and its effects.

I don't have time to contradict all of them, but for example, people in Western Europe pay more for gasoline because they have amazing public transportation. That's something we need to adopt.

In addition, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and the Soviet Union were not socialist.

The bottom line is that the free markets create oppression because only those who already have money and power can actually get ahead. Contrary to popular thought, rags to riches stories do not happen due to a capitalist system. Capitalism exploits labor, deepens the divides between rich and poor and justifies horrific human conditions.

I would take a system that at least ATTEMPTS to preserve human dignity over one that could care less whether people live or die and one where the earth's resources are exploited without regard for future generations.

Is socialism perfect? Certainly not. Is the idea a step in the right direction? Definitely. Is all capitalism inherently evil? No.

I don't advocate a pure system of either kind; I'm just saying that socialism is not as evil as you make it out to be.


Hello (CSU Pueblo) and Miami:


CSU, The Nazi party was called the National Socialist Party. The U.S.S.R was called The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic. Mussolini called Italy the Socialists States of Italy.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you have more public transportation, then wouldn't the price of gas go down as to encourage more people to drive. That's what happened here. Gas at $.50, we started car-pooling, using our sucky public trans, threatened to Drill off our Coasts and in Alaska, and the next thing you know, the price goes down to $2.00.

No such thing as rags to Riches? Have you heard of a local Atlanta Guy named Tyler Perry? He was at one point so poor, poor people refused to associate with him.

Earths Resources: We have barely touched the amount that this planet has to offer. Canada alone has a 100 miles shelf with enough oil to fuel every car in the world for 45 years. Same with Montana, a shelf of oil that will last 100 years.

No Government run system is perfect. However, let people have the Freedom to do what they want, when they want to do it, without an entity to stand in their way. If they fall, then they have learned a lesson, and let them get back up on their own. When a baby first learns to walk, and falls, do you stop that baby from trying to walk?

MIAMI, I will watch this video on Daniel Hannon this weekend when I have more time. I have not viewed anything with him before, thus cannot comment yeh or Yah on this.
Also, Feel instead of think hits the spot. It is great to feel and show kindness to others. Americans donate more to the poor masses of the world than any other Country combined...Even the EU. We donate to the EU.
Go by these words:

"If you’re twenty and not Liberal...You have no heart. If you’re thirty and not Conservative...You have no brain."

I say give the option. In our Public Government Schools, teach both capitalism and Socialism. Show the goods and beds of each. Let the kids explore on their own, and let them report back in a brief at what they discovered. Schools today teach one side...Socialism. Classes on Government, Economics, and Money management are next to non-existent.

I still want CSU to defend here argument.
I have been waiting two days now. Take your time; you have a lot of research to do. Yet if this is your passion, and it is something you can defend without question, you should be able to spit out a defending argument on queue. However, its okay...Take you time. The Jeopardy music will not run out after 30 seconds.


A FOURTH PERSON JOINS THE DEBATE:

Arizona:

I agree totally the states should have more power in running their own state and the federal government should stay out of it! I think that the people that run each state has a better awareness of what each individual state may be lacking in example education, health care, roads..... The federal government is having trouble running the post office and the VA hospitals...what the hell are they trying to prove...

I am not sure why she is even part of this group sounds like her idea's are opposite of what we are trying to accomplish! I could be wrong.

(CSU Pueblo) wrote

Ha-ha, Arizona, you're exactly right! I'm actually extremely liberal and a radical feminist to boot. I just figured I'd come and see what you all had to say. Now that I've done that, I'm going to excuse myself from this group. It's not that I don't want to continue this discussion, but I've had my rabble rousing fun, and now I'm going to go work on building the movements that are important to me.

You all have been great sports and thanks for the interesting exchange.

As you can see. She never defended her argument. If your Liberal and you have read this, feel free to defend your argument in the comments.

To sign up for our regular emails, go to the "Subscribe via email" icon on the top right. You will recieve regular emails and the blast.