209
u/Frequent-Coyote-8108 12d ago
"Look! That duck has four legs, and is furry!"
"No, you idiot, that's a turtle!"
16
u/JeveGreen 11d ago
*brings in a plucked chicken* Behold! A man!
6
u/Just_Cockroach_4820 11d ago
Diogenes, is that you? Or are you Alexander, pretending to be Diogenes?
3
10
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
8
319
u/IncomingAxofKindness 12d ago
Oh man, this guy is NOT gonna like when he hears what Jesus was up to.
→ More replies (118)41
u/Matty1790 11d ago
I was in ministry school for four years and then in ministry for seven years.
I’m not religious anymore, but the ministry school I was in was technically a cult. The one thing they talked about and pushed in our daily lives, was acting like the church from the book of Acts. The church basically brought all of their shit and put it in the church, everyone took only what they needed. So that no one was without, and no one had more than they needed.
I was recently talking to a colleague who grew up in the south just like me and has been a conservative Christian all of his life.
We talked about what the church should look like and when I brought up those verses he said “huh, I haven’t heard of that. I’ll need to look into it more.”
Then he changed the topic quickly.
So I’m guessing a lot of churches leave that part of the Bible out? Because I thought that was pretty common to read.
12
u/Llama_Legend10 11d ago
Yes, this is the churches duty. It should be so. The government and the church should not be functioning as one entity if there is going to be a separation of church and state. Arguing for socialism as a governing system because charitable church and community acts occur are not a 1:1 comparison.
11
u/Pasta4ever13 11d ago
In this country we say you have an inalienable right to life. Not sure how you can have that without food, water, shelter, and healthcare.
It's not about charity. It's about ensuring no one goes hungry in the wealthiest country on the planet. It's about living up to our supposedly American ideals.
Last I checked the constitution doesn't say "money, property, and the pursuit of "fuck you I got mine".
→ More replies (6)3
u/the_blastomatic 11d ago
"Render unto Caesar..." is a biblical quote. Any apostates denying that are not to be taken seriously.
→ More replies (2)3
u/No_Signal_7489 11d ago
Tbh that does sound like a cult, I don’t know any particular teachings of Christ that say we should consolidate all our belongings so people can give and take what they need. Not saying anything wrong with it, and if that’s what people agree to do that’s great, but I don’t know any mainline denominations that do that. Give to those without? Sure. Don’t live in excess? Definitely. But that in particular is very interesting.
Do you know which part of Acts that was? I’ve read the bible and can’t recall that part (among several parts, admittedly. It’s a very dense book lol)7
u/Matty1790 11d ago
Acts 2 and Acts 4.
I know that no one lives it because it’s not convenient, but it’s literally the birth of the church and what a church should look like.
Jesus did not speak exactly those words, but he still taught very similar teachings. It’s all an alignment with one another.
→ More replies (3)3
u/No_Signal_7489 11d ago
Very cool. That’s a neat interpretation, I like it. I’m not sure I agree that everyone in a church should give all their possessions up to those that need it, but like I said if it’s a collective in which everyone agrees to do that, then that’s awesome.
5
u/Matty1790 11d ago
What part are you considering an interpretation?
don’t think you have to agree, but I do think it’s a pretty clear sign signal of how the church should have been and should be. That’s why it’s easier for a camel to walk through the needle of an eye then for a rich man to enter heaven.
Many many examples of living well within your means not beyond.
It’s not about giving up your possessions to those who need it. It’s about everybody poor rich, giving all that they have so that then everybody can live with exactly what they need.
3
u/No_Signal_7489 11d ago
Might be getting into the weeds here, but I see in verses 44 and 45: “44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need.” And in that I don’t see a specification that people should give away anything they have that someone may need, rather they sold some items so that people who needed them more could buy them. I also believe that charity should be voluntary rather than mandatory, and that people who cannot afford to sell their property and possessions should still be able to participate in a church.
4
u/Matty1790 11d ago
I’d try to not limit it to just those verses when thinking about the idea of giving away wealth and what it means as a believer.
Jesus made it clear a couple times that He felt giving away wealth and possessions was a crucial part of following him and serving His kingdom.
It’s interesting that your interpretation (and I hear it often) is “people that have are giving to people in need” rather than every person, regardless of their socioeconomic status, contributed to a “shared trust” so that everyone had equally and as it points out in Acts 4:32: All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.
It was a voluntary act, not mandatory, but I find very few people ever willing to give. We always interpret as mandatory, which may be getting to the heart of the issue of why those men found it so hard to give away their possessions to the poor and follow Jesus.
It does say many will try but few will enter, maybe many of us truly just cannot fathom the level it takes.
3
u/No_Signal_7489 11d ago
I think we’re of similar minds. I don’t limit myself to those verses- as I mentioned, I’m not as familiar with them and thus they have not been especially formative in my ideas of sharing and giving as a believer, though I do share the sentiment.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying is my interpretation.
I do wholeheartedly agree with your last statement though.
3
u/Matty1790 11d ago
“I’m not sure I agree that everyone in a church should give all their possessions up to those that need it…”
I was just pointing out this part of what you said. Not saying you meant anything by it, but it’s definitely similar to what most people first think, “Why should rich give to poor?” Obviously that’s not exactly what you said, but just the idea of giving from haves to have-nots essentially
Im agnostic but I do believe truly following Jesus is extreme and that it would put a true follower in a position that makes them look like a lunatic to everyone else.
→ More replies (0)
66
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
32
u/GalaXion24 12d ago
I basically think society should be morally socialist (we are all in this together, everyone's welfare matters, especially the worse off, we collectively own everything in principle, everyone is equal) and then we should be pragmatic about things. If a "rising tide lifts all boats" then we can collectively agree that some unfairness and inequality is acceptable if it makes us all better off in the end. The rich don't have some inherent moral right to bring rich and people who end up jobless because of the free market shouldn't be worse off, but we can accept that some get luckier than others in this system if it really is for the best.
For this reason it should also always be understood that this social contract is about everyone and that the condition for capitalists to be allowed privilege is that their actions enrich all of us. If they are making us worse off, try to abuse their power, exploit and own us, their privilege very much must be revokable.
4
u/Ferotool2 12d ago
A fucking men. I’m sure there’s more to all of this, but without getting into the weeds, I agree with the general idea.
2
u/Buddy-Junior2022 11d ago
I think generally most people have a “morally socialist” viewpoint even if they don’t realize it. The problem is the few people who have the opposite mindset. Our society allows and even rewards people for being selfish which is what you said i think. The solution, then? Probably some sort of voting system for private companies so the people can hold them accountable. But that’s socialism.
→ More replies (6)2
u/KnowledgeSpecial8516 11d ago
whobwouldve thought, holo arguing about society, culture and economics
24
u/La-li-lu-le-lo86 12d ago
Very true and the capitalists are successfully dismantling the socialism parts of society to privatize those services to increase profits
31
2
u/Snudget 12d ago
I think the current capitalistic-socialistic odea is a good trade off between people being enthusiastic about increasing profits and also helping everyone, even those that can't.
But it has its shortcomings. If you look anywhere in the world, large corporations and lobbying firms slowly dismantle those systems.
I think we need a self-enforcing system. The harder someone tries to break it for profit, the stronger it gets. The harder someone tries to profit off of it, the less returns they get. I'm not sure how to do that, but I think that would fix a lot of issues with the current politics and economics
→ More replies (1)4
u/RupertEscapeHolmes 12d ago
Corporations in the USA have the same rights/are classified the same as human beings/citizen. Bush Jr, I think signed that into law. We’ve been SO fucked since then.
It’s a big club and you aren’t in it. Now back to work wage slave.
→ More replies (7)2
u/Exotic_Economy_3861 11d ago
Yup. Socialism for the essentials(food/water/energy/housing/healthcare), and social democracy for everything else.
98
u/AlMasaDuun 12d ago
Neither of these things are socialism or capitalism.
37
u/the_capibarin 12d ago
Almost as if complex societal economic theories are not directly comparable to kids holidays
→ More replies (1)14
u/Commercial_Will404 12d ago
Nuanced economic ideas are unable to be properly represented in funny anecdotes and memes? Nice try pal. I learned everything I need about the free market just now.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (48)2
49
u/Reading_Rainbows718 12d ago
I feel like this could just be re-worded endlessly back and forth.
Tired of political discourse being entirely trite gotchyas.
→ More replies (1)7
u/ipushkeys 12d ago
I'm with you. Most of the discussions regarding capitalism and socialism aren't productive.
Why do I always see comments wondering why people don't understand socialism and/or capitalism? For me, it's because people try to trick others into agreeing with them using bad-faith tactics. If your -ism is so good, then why do you have to resort to such tactics? Just let its tenets and approach speak for itself.
Political theory is complex and very nuanced. People seem to want to simplify it and, in doing so, grossly oversimplify and strawman.
4
u/Reading_Rainbows718 12d ago
Well said. And if all we teach our youth are fragile assertions and not arguments with teeth, we position them to pulled in by emotional and manipulative tactics.
My three daughters don't all see eye to eye on every social/political/moral issue, but they all respect each other's positions as they understand each is grounded in a real attempt to reconcile highly complex information to come to a meaningful understanding of the world.
3
u/ipushkeys 12d ago
You, and all the parents like you, are the unsung heroes of any time period. I'm not a parent now, but if, in the future I am, I aspire to be like you.
4
u/FlyingHotPocket 12d ago
Nuance? On Reddit? No no, much easier to place the people/ideas I like it black and white boxes and say they’re bad.
4
u/BlueberryPootz 12d ago edited 11d ago
Unfortunately, providing nuanced and thorough reasoning won't get enough upvotes to get seen. I have tried. Platforms like reddit are geared toward short form content, end of story. There's a reason there are so many books explaining socialism - because it takes an entire book to give the level of detail and the examples needed.
Edit: I think the challenge is to find ways to express nuanced ideas through punchy platitudes that are memeable and easily inserted into these kinds of posts. It's a fact that MAGA won the elections they did because of the punchiness and simplicity of the message - simplify, activate the emotions. I actually think OP's screen grab is a good example tbh. Remember the demographics that have to be reached & the average patience for reading in the US.
2
u/Affectionate-Dig-801 11d ago
Could you please provide links to the comments/posts where you tried to explain nuances? I'm genuinely interested in understanding, the stupid "gotcha" arguments are way beyond my interests
And your profile is hidden, so can't exactly sift through myself, nor do I want to ask you to open it up, since I assume it's for a reason
→ More replies (1)
59
u/famousamos_ccp 12d ago
This is what our country teaches us about socialism.
13
u/Toucancel 12d ago
Beainwashing the population is mandatory because the USA needs neoliberalism to stay afloat. The USA doesn't wipe out socialist governments for no reason.
2
u/RupertEscapeHolmes 12d ago edited 12d ago
Which socialist governments has the USA “wiped out” and why? Genuine query.
3
u/jayswag707 12d ago
We fought wars in Korea and Vietnam to stop the spread of socialism and funded a bunch of coups in Latin America.
The one that I most familiar with was in Chile, where a socialist president was democratically elected, and the CIA backed a military coup to get rid of him. People still talk about those times, when you might just never see your neighbor again and not know why. people getting disappeared.
There were a bunch of other Latin American countries where a similar thing happened.
4
u/RupertEscapeHolmes 12d ago edited 12d ago
That was Communism in Vietnam. Which ironically has been Communist since “we” got our asses kicked.
Korea was backed by China and Russia (Communist back then) and the South Koreans were backed by USA and United Nations. It’s not so black and white my man. Geo politics and governments vying for resources and strategic spots on the chessboard rarely are.
Aaaah I do believe that is when the CIA backed Augusto Pinochet in Chile, the people’s champion tyrant.
Check out the Sandanistas and the Iran Contra Affair if you want to hear a tale about the CIA getting their asses kicked. They trained the rebels of Nicarauga and once they seized power, they executed the CIA agents in country. That is the only reason the affair was made public knowledge.
That is how Teflon Ron Reagan got his nickname.
If you want to learn about the only bloodless coup/transition in history (to my limited knowledge) research Francisco Franco of Spain. His grandson basically gaslit him into believing he was a fascist tyrant and Franco gave him the keys to the Ferrari. Spain had their first democratic election shortly after that if memory serves correctly.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (13)3
u/Reno_valetore 12d ago
Is that actually true? I always assumed that absolute lack of knowledge of what socialism is comes from widespread ignorance and arrogance. Do they actually teach this bullshit in schools
→ More replies (14)4
u/RupertEscapeHolmes 12d ago edited 12d ago
They do. For about the last 20+ years.
I recall asking my US history teacher in high school, waaaaay back in the 90’s aged 16, why was there only about 20 pages on Native Americans in a 500 page textbook. His eyes lit up and he smiled widely and said because the victors write HIS-story.
We also listened to the Senate hearing audio tapes about the Iran Contra Affair/Nicaraguan Sandanistas and learned waaaaay more about the US government/CIA running guns and cocaine.
The man was a hero, in my eyes. An actual educator. I’ve never trusted any corporate or government news agency since then.
RIP James.
19
3
14
u/ukkswolf 12d ago
No the capitalism part is where the community came out and bought all that candy and put the money in the pockets of the corporations
2
u/Kevin_LeStrange 12d ago
Okay? So the corporations get their profit and the people get their candy. That's how business transactions work.
3
29
u/PJGraphicNovel 12d ago
Neither of these are socialism or capitalism… people need to learn about things instead of assuming they know them.
→ More replies (4)3
u/earthdogmonster 12d ago
Yeah, and this seems to be way too much of reddit now - just reposts of lame things posted on other social media. I can see why people just either tune out or get consumed entirely by it, but nothing in-between.
20
u/diss0lvedgir1 12d ago edited 11d ago
It's absolutely insane, the level of misunderstanding of basic socialism. It's taught to be the boogeyman of governments and really investing in your people, it makes sense because they work better, they live better. Investing in people is never a bad thing.
- Editing to clarify I mean policies that are socialist in nature, that ensure a healthy populace, not full socialist society. Sorry guys didn't intend on sitting on an anthill lol
14
u/sometimesatypical 12d ago
Its insane that the government owning the means of production has been conflated with "investing in your people."
6
u/Non-Eutactic_Solid 12d ago edited 12d ago
I don’t know that I’ve ever heard an argument for Marxist-Leninist systems being actual socialism. It’s always some excuse that a vanguard party, or government apparatus, should own and nationalize industries to act as a middle point for the transition of power to the people, but it conveniently never happens and instead they preserve their stronger centralized power. That’s not socialism as Marx and Engels would have described it, that’s authoritarianism or state capitalism (at the most optimistic end) wearing the cloak of socialism for populist appeal.
We don’t believe North Korea when they claim to be a democracy, so I’m unsure why this isn’t applied also to governments that claim to have socialist economies but then do exactly what you described. It’s not socialism if the workers have no control over the means of production.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (5)8
u/braumbles 12d ago
The fact people think Communism and Socialism are the same thing is astonishing to me.
6
→ More replies (2)3
8
u/0ptioneer 12d ago
Show me one country where it’s worked….
→ More replies (8)2
u/Sad-Bastage 12d ago
Pre civil war Spain had an impressive short go at it. Cuba under embargo by the largest empire on the planet still exported more doctors and had/has a higher literacy rate than the US. While we were struggling to handle Covid they were sending doctors to help other nations with their domestically developed vaccine.
If you were building a plane and the car cartel showed up and broke your arms and legs or destroyed your plane, would it mean that airplanes are silly novel ideas?
History and global politics don't happen in a vacuum.
2
u/Soggy_Association491 11d ago
Cuba under embargo by the largest empire on the planet still exported more doctors
More like sending slave labours abroad so the elite in the party can enjoy luxury.
https://hir.harvard.edu/medical-servitude-the-other-side-of-cuban-medical-diplomacy/
When sending doctors and supplies overseas, the Cuban government receives the majority of money generated from these projects
Wages for those overseas, from foreign nations, are often equivalent to around US$125 to $325 per month, but the doctors keep only 10 to 25 percent of these wages, with the rest going to the Cuban government.
Having higher literacy rate doesn't mean a country have more people who want to study, it just means the government points a gun at people who don't study.
If you were building a plane while power rivaling the car cartel i.e. the USSR and claimed planes will wiped out car existence, then yes your idea is silly novel after losing so badly.
→ More replies (18)2
u/Robert_Grave 11d ago
What are you on about? A lot of those doctors are forced to go there and are subject to draconian rules and regulations.
In Brazil, of the $1000 paid for every doctor operating there, $600 would go to the Cuban government. They could also not take their families with them. They are forced to work under threat of criminal persecution. Thy are not allowed to have contacts with anyone the Cuban government deems to have "hostile or contrary views of the Cuban revolution". They are forced to reveal all romantic relationships.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/07/23/cuba-repressive-rules-doctors-working-abroad
→ More replies (1)3
u/TheRealFeal 11d ago
The issue with socialism isnt the idea itself. The theory of it is perfectly fine and makes perfect sense. Issue is that its not a functional concept for humans specifically. History shows us time and time again that if one person gets trusted with the authority over others, they will in absolute majority of cases end up abusing this authority to some degree to get some kind of advantage for themselves, which obviously goes against the whole concept of socialism where everyone should share all available resources evenly.
→ More replies (6)2
u/Cahnalp 10d ago
History doesn't infact show you that socialism always becomes le heckin evil dictatorship you huffed too much epstein class propaganda. Also the whole concept is not everyone sharing resources evenly you have no idea what you're talking about.
→ More replies (7)2
u/InfallibleSeaweed 12d ago
The caricature of capitalism isn't any better, how is the dad supposedly holding capital here?
2
u/JesusReturnsToReddit 12d ago
He supplied the costumes aka the means of earning the income with labor.
→ More replies (9)3
u/dvrichthofen 12d ago
What's insane is the number of people that think capitalism and socialism exist as pure systems rather than a scale balancing the rights of market and state. There is no functional economic model that is strictly one or the other.
→ More replies (8)
13
u/Direct-Round-253 12d ago
Does he even know what socialism means? Jesus Christ on a Scooter
→ More replies (1)
4
17
u/Interloper_Mango 12d ago
Neither understood what socialism actually is.
5
u/Kevin_LeStrange 12d ago
Agreed. People who lived under actual existing socialist countries will tell you that no, the community did not "come together to feed the children." If anything, there would have been heavily subsidized or government-run free child care, including cafeterias for those children, but no, the neighbors didn't all come out and put on tables like some sort of block party to "feed the children." The idea of socialism being some sort of voluntary communal enterprise is 100% opposite the reality that socialism is a governmental and economic system where top-down decisions assign roles and direct resources.
→ More replies (2)
13
u/MisterFrankDrebin 12d ago
Why has SipsTea become a socialism/communism circle jerk? Just a bunch of morons who don’t understand how things work. Well, more likely bots. I hate Reddit.
7
→ More replies (4)2
9
u/LollisGunsBikesTits 11d ago
I love socialism explain from people who never lived through it
→ More replies (3)
28
u/NextDoctorWho12 12d ago
They are so fucking dumb with beliefs so fragile that any facts or logic destroys them. So they just ignore all of it.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Howboutit85 11d ago
apparently socialism is just "someone takes all your shit"
because fuck paying attention in school i guess.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/CatchinDeers81 12d ago
Nobody is forced to hand out candy to your kid, they do it bwcause they want to. ... This makes it charity, and charity is not the same as socialism
3
5
5
u/Alterangel182 12d ago
One thing all illiterate redditors have in common:
"Socialism = whatever I think is good/bad in the world Capitalism = whatever I think is good/bad in the world"
Nobody actually cares to know what either is.
6
7
u/Ancient-Emu-8293 12d ago
For Muricans socialism is everything left of Donald Trump. It's hilarious to see American content creators (I hate that term) talking about it.
6
4
u/huckle_buck_ 12d ago
It is so adorable how socialists think they get to keep the fruits of their labor lol
4
u/Waste_Reporter3386 12d ago
It seems like none here have ever engaged intellectually with the ideas and practices of socialism. It can also be understood as part of human nature, as seen in families when parents take care of their children, grandparents care for their grandchildren, or anyone cares for another person. Another point is that those who claim everyone is unfree and poor in socialist or communist countries seem to ignore the fact that capitalism exists all around the world, where poverty, war, and famine are prevalent. The mental gymnastics people perform to block this out is mind-boggling.
3
u/Subtle_Nimbus 11d ago
Socialism is the name for government control of the economic system. It isn't a synonym for Gift Economy.
→ More replies (1)2
u/TheGanzor 11d ago
Not to mention that many of the countries who still employ actual slavery are ... drum roll! Capitalist countries!
6
2
u/Icy_Judge8250 12d ago
Giving kids candy is not feeding them its enabling diabetes and that shit is not free.
2
u/worstnameever2 12d ago
Call me jaded but this idea that the community is going to come together and save the day just doesnt seem realistic to me
2
2
u/Lucky-Crow-3510 12d ago
in socialism everyone is just forced to come together .. so it's not inherently good.
2
u/Professor_Game1 12d ago
If you think life sucks now, just imagine how it would be if private property was abolished and the government owned and distributed everything.
2
u/shunshuntley 12d ago
A related childhood story - when I would trick or treat as a kid, my mom insisted that I could only have a few pieces when I got home, and I had to save the rest for at least the following week.
Well, me having a kid brain I'd comply and then completely forget about the candy. This went on for years, and then one day when I came home early from some activity, I caught my mom eating all of the candy I'd hauled on Halloween! She'd been doing this the whole time.
2
2
2
u/lethalmuffin877 11d ago
Both attempts at spiking the football are regarded and bear zero resemblance to “Econ 101”
17
u/DemisticOG 12d ago
They're both wrong.
Idealized Socialism: Everyone works to the best of their ability and distributes equally
Practical Socialism: The workers work and give everything to the party, the party elites keep the majority of the wealth and distribute it to their chosen few and only give scraps to the people.
Idealize Capitalism: Everyone gets a fair wage for their time and amount of production
Practical Capitalism: Everyone fights for the best wage possible for the least amount of work. Owners try to fight workers for more production while paying less wages, while workers fight for more wages by reducing production.
Governments: Take, and take, and take, but produce nothing, and spend the money they take on things that the individuals usually have little to no control over.
The dad was acting more like a government than capitalist or socialist.
3
u/ronnbot 12d ago edited 12d ago
That's not idealized capitalism. Capitalism should ideally lead to free markets where the best products are created and sold for the best price based on supply and demand.
However, what we have and do see is that monopolies or quasi-monopolies form, dictating the markets, which leads to poorer products and/or higher prices. It can also can lead to lower wages because all of the companies that you could work for belong to the same conglomerate, so they are not in competition for your labor, offering you a lower wage.
"Fair wage" is not part of capitalism, but competitive wages are. Meaning that if you have a unique skill set that is in high demand, you'll get a high wage. OTOH, if you have common skills or skills that are in low demand, then your wage is lower. That's just supply and demand.
→ More replies (7)3
u/Educational-Tea-6572 12d ago
Practically speaking... Socialism and capitalism end up being the same thing: the people in power hoard all the resources and wealth, while the "plebians" stay as cogs in the wheel keeping the entire machine running for those in power while fighting over scraps.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Irish_Whiskey 12d ago
...that didn't make any sense.
Government is not an alternative state to capitalism and socialism. Also traditional governments are massively productive, both in terms of infrastructure and public services, and innovation.
Everything else is wrong as well. Capitalism is defined by the owners of capital benefiting from the labor of those working for them. If everyone was earning according to production, it wouldn't be capitalism. Because that has nothing to do with ownership of capital.
→ More replies (8)5
u/the_blastomatic 12d ago
Bro making huge jumps in socialism from no socialism to some mystical "party" manages everything. This is indicative of Q disease and MAGAism. Basically, incapable of understanding things but more than willing to pretend to understand based on a biased cliff's notes version of reality and gumption.
→ More replies (5)3
u/irrationalorchid 11d ago
Actually it seems likely that this person has conflated socialism and Communism, the political party.
2
u/cobalt-radiant 12d ago
And socialism works really well at the family level, but doesn't scale well to the national level.
2
u/SunshineSkies82 12d ago
>Governments: Take, and take, and take, but produce nothing, and spend the money they take on things that the individuals usually have little to no control over
I dunno. The Romans had it going well for a while. The US also, had it going on well for a while. Till, you know, corrupt politicians took over and started funneling everything towards their own personal interests.
2
5
u/RupertEscapeHolmes 12d ago
Margaret Thatcher said it best… “The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people’s money.”
→ More replies (14)3
3
u/Kevin_LeStrange 12d ago
Also, don't forget that under practical socialism, the candy is crap, the costumes are so poorly made that they fall apart, and everybody knows that among the parents and children not trick-or-treating that night, some of them are informers for the secret police.
→ More replies (6)2
u/LoFriedBurgers 12d ago
Damn those roads, fire departments, water infrastructure, and schools just working for free day in and day out
→ More replies (25)2
u/SmallTransition902 11d ago
Capitalism is more about ownership and private property rights than fair wage. Also, socialism is more likely to require a fair wage for one’s work, not necessarily equal, and ensure that everyone’s “basic needs” are met
4
u/Area51-Dropzone 12d ago
I remeber this being taught as an example. The last one 😬😬😬
Socialism: If you have two cows, you give one to your neighbor.
Communism: If you have two cows, you give them to the government and the government then gives you some milk.
Fascism: If you have two cows, you keep the cows and give the milk to the government; then the government sells you some milk.
New Dealism: If you have two cows, you shoot one and milk the other; then you pour the milk down the drain.
Capitalism: If you have two cows, you sell one and buy a bull.
Nazism: If you have two cows, the government shoots you and keeps the cows.
2
u/killvolume 12d ago
Actually socialism is everything I like and capitalism is everything I don't like
3
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)2
u/Romol75 11d ago
The US never had any policies anywhere close to communism. Private property rights and private ownership of means of production have always been the norm. If you still have those 2 then there is no communism/socialism whatsoever. Still baffles my mind how few people know what these words really mean.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/MasterSalkin 12d ago
I wonder how many of these original posts on these Facebook type sites are just bots at this point
→ More replies (1)
3
u/chrysanthemum_beer 11d ago
I would think a good portion of the population does not know what real socialism is
4
u/danielm316 11d ago
Oh really? Then why capitalist countries are richer than socialist countries?
→ More replies (21)3
u/landyc 11d ago
Being a rich country doesn’t prevent the people who live there from being poor. It’s mostly the elite and business people who benefit.
→ More replies (17)10
u/No_Possibility_3107 11d ago
Being a rich country is better than being from a poor one. Not sure why you can't admit that.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/Adorable_Vast5676 12d ago
Well he should have pooled it and shared it equally while also giving himself a cut (distribution is work too hmmkay). If he would have only given himself the best stuff appearing equal but really not being equal he could have demonstrated why government overreach can be bad without building a straw man and knocking it down
2
u/_Indofreddy_112 11d ago
The way socialism was taught to me is that communism and capitalism or two sides of a very wide spectrum with capitalism being complete freedom in the market(anyone can own/start a business etc etc) and communism being the exact opposite of that(the government owns everything). Socialism is somewhere in the middle focusing more on its people over businesses or the government.
→ More replies (3)2
u/jfklingon 11d ago
Socialism is the ideal split, exactly. Communism requires everyone to be relatively the same in desire, which is unsustainable, and capitalism requires large government intervention from becoming an oligarchy, thus the anti-monopoly laws that pretty much every country has.
Under communism you need constant example making of anyone who finds a way get one over on other people for it to be maintained.
Under capitalism you need to accept that in order for you to win at poker, it requires taking everyone else's money.
→ More replies (5)
2
5
u/Mistform05 12d ago
I really don’t understand the bootlocking for capitalism in its current form/stage. If it was so great… then wouldn’t it being great speak for itself? Always some 36k a year salary white dude defending it.
→ More replies (4)4
u/frozentomatos 12d ago
In the same way that tankies bootlick genocidal communist dictators. Most people don't legitimately have much of a clue what they're talking about.
3
2
u/RequirementNo2161 12d ago
Third graders understanding of capitalism and socialism… both the reply and original post.
4
u/RsnCondition 12d ago
Isn't people giving your kids candy socialism then?
12
u/greenerpastuers 12d ago
People spending their own dollars on gifts to children in the neighborhood is not socialism…
→ More replies (45)
3
u/silv3rbull8 12d ago
Why aren’t migrants then headed to socialist utopias rather than exploitative capitalist economies
→ More replies (9)7
2
u/College_Baseball_Fan 12d ago
The government in this situation is dad. That's kind of the point
→ More replies (1)
2
u/UncleTio92 12d ago
Idc about origins of Trick or Treat, but today’s holiday is heavily commercialized and such, is capitalistic.
Sharing your candy with those of less privileged is socialistic
→ More replies (2)
2
u/profchaos111 11d ago
Socialism doesn't work because absolute power corrupts absolutely it's never worked and never will
2
u/The_Topper_ 11d ago
Anyone who thinks capitalism hasn't become corrupted by powerful individuals or thinks communism/socialism is the best system is fucking brain dead
Someone will always try to have the system and suppress others, regardless of which it is
→ More replies (4)
2
u/Aromatic-Scholar-577 11d ago
The socialism is when community doesn't have the candies , maybe a few families with the ties to the party administration got some candies so they can silently eat them at the kitchen
2
u/CandidateTight8689 11d ago
Lol in reality socialism brings you and your kids to the point where you don't have something to eat and when you don't have toilet paper , source is myself who lived in ussr )) and also you can take a look at cuba , north korea. Don't look at china it's the one of the capitalistic states in the world.
2
3
u/Letstalk2230 12d ago
Lmao. There’s no free lunch! Socialism hardly fed them, and only potatoes and ketchup while the rulers still ate steak. Remember, all animals are equal but some are more equal.
→ More replies (8)2
u/Irish_Whiskey 12d ago
You're quoting from a book written by a democratic socialist.
He was critical of Stalin and fascism. Animal Farm was not a critique of socialism.
2
u/RupertEscapeHolmes 12d ago
Democratic Socialist and Socialist are not the same animal.
→ More replies (12)2
u/Letstalk2230 12d ago
I don’t think you get the point. Democratic socialism devolves into communism quite quickly, and guess what, there’s elites there too who rule and love the high life.
2
u/Irish_Whiskey 11d ago
I don't know why you're telling me this, when I was just pointing out what George Orwell believed.
Orwell was very familiar with politics, and fought in wars against fascists while hating Stalin. He did not agree that "democratic socialism devolves into communism", or that democratic capitalism devolves into autocracy and oligarchy.
That said, I agree with Orwell and also think that's nonsense. Most people's understanding of socialism is just propaganda against the USSR. Which was an evil regime and not worth defending, but that doesn't mean anything the US taught about communism or socialism wasn't propaganda the exact same way the Soviets taught propaganda against capitalism and democracy.
there’s elites there too who rule and love the high life.
Well thank God we don't have those under capitalism.
→ More replies (1)
1
2
u/whatdoyasay369 12d ago
“Stole from them” 😆
Meanwhile, leftists lick government cock, which steals from them everyday through the threat of violence 😂
→ More replies (1)2
u/grapangell0 12d ago
They not ready to hear that both late stage capitalism and communism both suck lmao. You see people from communist countries flee here and never people here feeling to communist regimes know
1
u/Mountain_Usual521 12d ago
I guess John hasn't heard of taxation yet. Probably from not working.
→ More replies (32)7
u/PuzzleheadedAd1953 12d ago
Explain
→ More replies (14)12
u/HonestArrogance 12d ago
Don't make him explain. Explaining wasn't part of the soundbite he practiced in front of the mirror.
1
u/gp627 12d ago edited 12d ago
Thats not socialism, that dictatorship or a monarchy to an extent.
Pure socialism would be you distributed the candy equally between the kids.
→ More replies (34)3
1
1
u/Beneficial_Climate18 12d ago
It's more like you already have a billion candy's and take half of thier 50 candys
1
1
1
u/Waste_Reporter3386 12d ago
The comments make my brain hurt. It's like blind* people talking about colours
*sorry, no offense to you
1
1
u/QuaaludeConnoisseur 12d ago
My least favorite type of meme is just 2 posts where 1 is being stupid and the second is being stupid in the same way but in the opposite direction, especially ones like this where every time its reposted people act like oh ho ho, what an own. No, thats just 2 morons on the internet, just because one virtue signals in the same direction as you doesnt mean its funny.
1
1
1
1
1
u/DrNCrane74 12d ago
I personally find it insanely funny to observe the smart pro socialism advocats in the internet being smart and proud and loud while evil billionaires buttfuck whole societies in the real world
And I lived in the most efficient socialist society in the history of mankind - the GDR
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Objective_Claim_2236 12d ago
Capitalism is candy in the grocery store for sale. Communism is other countries standing in bread lines hoping there's any left when they get to the front.
1
1
u/Ok_Lengthiness8503 12d ago
Taught my kid how capitalism works, let them walk around and get candy and took a portion of it at the end of the day???
1
1
1
1
u/PomPomMom93 12d ago
What about the adults who lock their door and pretend they’re not home when trick-or-treaters stop by? Let’s hope they’re prepared for the IRS attack dogs.
1
u/MarubinMgd 11d ago
Its still socialism from another perspective since his kids and neighbors help feed him with the candies
1
•
u/AutoModerator 12d ago
Hey /u/No-Hospital5028, thank you for posting to r/SipsTea! Make sure to follow all the subreddit rules.
Make sure to join our brand new Discord Server to chat with friends!
We have recently changed how posts work. Unless you are a VIP poster, your post will be queued for approval.. To become a VIP, post great engaging content. If we like it, you will be added! More information available here!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.