Well don’t start one about “white fragility” that got me suspended. But the reason giving was I was too combative. So I guess none of these current topics are combative?
2 Likes
Socialism just doesn’t work. Humans aren’t driven by making sure everyone gets the same thing. That is against our nature. We are greedy, we are competitive, we are driven to succeed if there is a benefit to me. We are territorial by nature, we are capitalists by nature. It just is.
The greedy part of our nature has taken over government. We found a way to get our cake and eat it too with deficit spending. The elites have gamed the system so that there is tons of government spending and they ain’t paying for it. We are just racking up astronomical amounts of debt. They get us to look the other way by focusing on these professional wrestling matches. Trump is the greatest professional wrestler of all time. That is just the show. The reality is large amounts of government spending are going to the elites. We aren’t complaining about it because our taxes haven’t gone up.
If you want sanity in government to come back, start paying for all of this governance. When your paycheck goes down, you will start to ask the question “what are they spending the money on?”.
The Inca practiced what many scholars consider to be a successful form of communism.
Ba ba but socialism/communism is evil because it doesn’t allow me to make a profit off my fellow mans labor and exploit him. We can’t have that. Then won’t be able to buy the huge yachts and have multiple multi million dollar home for me and my 2 dogs to live in
Go to Eastern Europe. Let them tell you how great it was.
They never practiced true communism. Authoritarian states run by a few elites kind of like Murica. If you think about it kind of say God is a communist provided mankind on earth everything he needed resource wise without ever asking for anything in return
Don’t be that guy… Just don’t be that guy. If your best argument are the Inca’s you need a better argument. All collectivized economies have eventually collapsed. It’s actually shown to work at a tribal/village level still. But as a macroeconomic theory it hasn’t worked in modern times.
And I don’t think anyone is going to confuse me with some of the “Reds under the bed” types around here.
1 Like
“No one is hated more than he who speaks the truth” -Plato
Are you just arguing for the sake of it?
Pro communists always come up with:
- but they never put into action true communism
- Pro communists never mention the 100’s of millions that have died or perished under these communist regimes like China with over 100 millions dead under Mao Tse tong. By the way man’s portrait is on full display all over China. Over 75 millions dead in Russia under Stalin. berniecommi always dodges the Stalin atrocities when asked.
- cuban people die every day trying to reach Florida. Is it because they like to swim, boating, experimenting with alligators? No just like current Venezuelans they have no food and no to. You might reply since they do not eat they do not need to.
- Every communist society has ended up as a dictatorship with RULES FOR THEE BUT NOT FOR ME. Does that sound familiar?
- Incas you bring up. For sure you do not condemn children, adults sacrifice. You are OK with it.
- Ask anyone that has lived under communist ruling on how they personally feel about your highly ignorant comment about true communism.
- Instead of LIKING, thinking that communism is the way to go educate yourself. There is nothing worse than to think something is true because someone told you it us true.
1 Like
1 Like
Touche
Not going to touch this with a ten foot pole.
2 Likes
Ok that was funny.
I’m the fly in the ointment, I’m the itch that needs scratching, I don’t accept dogma because I’m no root of the word(dogma) dog which is a obedient creature to his master or masters. I seek understanding in trying to understand human failing and seek the greater truth. To the failing. I’m the one who may disagree with what you have said but will defend your right to say it…
The Inca Empire was an absolute monarchy.
The Emperor, considered divine, was called “The Inca.”
Doesn’t sound like socialism or communism to me.
BAD example.
1 Like
I mean that’s great and all. But still no excuse for a really bad argument. And the “It’s never been implemented, correctly” is a really bad argument. It could very well be proven right over the course of time. But current real world results speak for themselves. Just like I argue on the other thread, about someone’s belief in pie in the sky, happy freedom magic, and unicorns that has no bearing on the real world. The results in the real world are what matter.
Confusing a economic system with the political system, just liked here in our country people believe capitalism and democracy are synonymous with one another. They are not
Like comparing apple and oranges. You can have one with out the other.
1 Like
In the Inca Empire, all land was owned by the Emperor. The people worked it in a manner similar to Medieval European serfs.
It’s true that there was no private property, but that’s not the same as in a Communist system.
It was more like a medieval European manorial feudal system, where all the land belonged to a King or Lord who would parcel it out to underlings with no ownership interest to work.
If the Inca Empire was Communist, then so was medieval Europe, following the same logic.
NOT!!!
Bad argument man.
The Inca Empire was no more socialist or communist than a Medieval European kingdom or empire would have been. Their land ownership and economic systems were basically the same: ROYALTY OWNED EVERYTHING!!!
Those are MONARCHIES……NOT socialist or communist states.
That’s NOTHING like a Communist system.
1 Like
Walks like duck quacks like duck looks like a duck probably is a duck Granted there are some sociologist who say it was a form of socialism others maybe not but have to agree it had a heavy characteristics of socialism and communism in the citizen to state relation to the state and to one another as citizen. The naysayer ( sociologist) who are reluctant to call it socialism they called.it Incaism.
Before the Spanish conquest of the Americas in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the Inca Empire spread down much of the modern South American coast in the Andes Mountains. The empire consisted of more than ten million inhabitants and had, at the time, a very unique political and economic system. The government divided land and animals amongst members of the nation, not necessarily equally, and a system was in place to take care of the elderly and sick. Social scientists have been debating how to classify the Inca Empire for centuries. Arguments have been made which classified the Inca Empire as a socialist state. Many elements of socialism existed in the Inca Empire, but can the state really be classified as socialistic?
The Incas moved into the area which is now known as the Cuzco Valley around 1200. Over the next 300 years they became one of the dominant empires in the “New World.” Rural Incas lived in small agricultural communities. According to Peter Bakewell, author of A History of Latin America, “the basic unit of society, apart from the family, was the ayllu, which seems fundamentally to have been a clan, a group of people descended from some common ancestor.”1 The ayllu played an important role in Incan society; it had landholdings for growing and raising domesticated animals like llamas and alpacas. Families in the ayllu owned their own homes, clothes, utensils, and often a garden or small plot of land. According to George Peter Murdock,
The clan owned collectively, however, all land outside the village. Its members enjoyed equal rights to game, wood, and pasturage on the communal forest and meadow, and they tilled in common a portion of the agricultural land for the support of the chief, the cult and the aged.
The government ensured that Inca families would be able to have the means of growing enough food for themselves. When an Inca couple was married, they were given a plot of land to cultivate called a tupu. The size of the plot varied depending on its productivity. When a child was born, the couple was given more land to be able to feed the child. For a daughter, the couple received half a plot, and for a son they received a whole plot. Once everyone in a community had a sufficient amount of land to support themselves, the rest of the land in the area belonged to the State. Each Inca family was also entitled to two llamas which would be used for wool, transportation, and the manure was used for fertilizer.
However, not all land was used for communal purposes all the time. Sometimes individual members of the community used the land for a period of time for personal use. Llamas and alpacas also grazed on the land. These large animals were used for work and their wool was used to make clothing in the Inca State.3 When a common couple was married the community built them a modest house.4 It was a custom in Incan society for people to help others in the community who were in need. “People were expected to lend their labor to cultivate neighbors’ land, and expected that neighbors would help them in due course. All capable people were collaborated to support the incapable—orphans, widows, the sick—with food and housing.”5 Inca commoners expected this courtesy from their neighbors. Many in peasant villages and communities depended on mutual assistance for survival. By looking at information from various sources it can be seen that many elements of the Inca Empire were socialistic.
Maybe we should try to be a little more like Sweden or Denmark? A coherent national health care program would be a good start.
If you don’t want government regulation and social services, you are welcome to move to Somalia.
1 Like
Maybe we should be a little more like those countries, you know, no minimum wage, monarchy, aristocracy, religious symbolism on the flag, and state religion eh?
HARD PASS!!!