Socialists Will Save The World


darkbeaver
Republican
#1

Go to Original
Ecuador Heads for Socialist Reform of Constitution
Agence France-Presse
Monday 16 April 2007
Ecuadorans overwhelmingly voted Sunday in favor of forming an assembly to rewrite the constitution, a project sought by leftist President Rafael Correa, according to initial, unofficial results.
Correa, who had staked his post on the outcome, was handed 78.1 percent of the votes, a Cedatos-Gallup exit poll showed. The private company's results were broadcast by the television network Ecuavisa.
Some 11.5 percent opposed the plan, according to the poll which was conducted among 40,000 voters and had a margin of error of at least two percentage points.
The official results were due in a week, electoral authorities said.
After weeks of political crisis in one of the most impoverished and unstable nations in South America, voters backed a move favored by Correa's ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
The landslide victory had been widely expected.
Opinion polls had shown roughly 70 percent of Ecuadorans would support Correa's proposal, but critics claimed it was unconstitutional and inspired by Chavez. A national assembly of elected supporters of the firebrand leftist leader rewrote Venezuela's constitution in 1999.
Correa, who took office three months ago, has set out a sweeping reform program for his five-year mandate that would include reversing free-market measures, renegotiating foreign oil contracts and cutting ties with the International Monetary Fund.
Although a close ally with Chavez, Correa has repeatedly denied he intends to take Ecuador in his footsteps.
"It's a day of national celebration, a victory for the people, for democracy," Correa said before casting his ballot at a school in northern Quito.
Some 9.2 million people are eligible to vote in the referendum, after an intense campaign in which Correa - the country's eighth president in a politically turbulent decade - was accused of trying to concentrate powers as Chavez had.
From Caracas, Chavez expressed great confidence in that "Correa will go forward with the support of the great majority."
"We wish the best for the Ecuadoran people and President Correa, who has heeded with courage and valor the call of 21st century socialism," Chavez said in his radio and TV program, "Hello President."
Correa has signaled he would quit if voters did not approve the project, which he sees as a key component of his "citizens' revolution."
The widely popular president, who enjoys approval ratings at 70 percent, said Saturday on the eve of the vote that he would "seriously consider" stepping down if his plan is rejected.
If approved, Ecuadorans would be called to elect between October and November the 130 members of a constitutional assembly who would be tasked with writing a new constitution, whose text would be submitted to a referendum in 2008.
Correa asked the public and the military to be vigilant against polling fraud, which he said he feared could be attempted by opponents on the right.
But election observers from the Organization of American States said they had seen no indication of wrongdoing so far.
Critics claimed that, like Chavez, Correa would use the assembly to concentrate power in his own hands and that this would scare off foreign investors.
"I don't believe in imitations, that is, taking the Venezuelan model and imposing it on Ecuador," said Jaime Villaroel, 37, an economist who handed out pamphlets warning voters against giving Correa "a blank check."
"There is a risk we'll go from being dependent on the United States to being dependent on President Chavez," said Villaroel.
The country recently was thrown into political crisis with the firings of lawmakers by an electoral court.
Tension eased a little after substitutes for the ousted members were sworn in, but the opposition deputies still claimed their ouster was illegal.

 
Colpy
Conservative
#2
Thanks for the good wishes in the "I'm Back" thread, DB.

And thanks for the laugh here.

Socialism is as dead as a doornail.
 
MikeyDB
#3
Who paid for your hosptial attention recently Colpy?
If it was you who picked up the tab do you imagine for a moment that the costs of research and medicine haven't been absorbed by the population at large through taxes?
Don't speak out of one side of your face when it's convenient to splash disdain on "socialists" then feel happy to reap the benefits of that same communal effort when it suits your needs and interests.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#4
I have always been a supporter of Medicare............gov't supported free medical care. I couldn't care less how it is delivered.

For the most part, the care I received was excellent.

There is a difference between social legislation, social responsibility, such as universal health care and a social safety net, as well as education etc.........and the nationalization of private interests and concentration of power...............

Everything in moderation.
 
Chukcha
#5
yeah, socialists will save it... will help it to collapse, that's for sure.
Didn't anyone know their motto "to helps us live better we need to kill all the people".
 
BitWhys
#6
Colpy, IMO you're using a rather restricted definition of socialism.

From a book called "The Great Transformation: the polical and economic origin of our time", a book I highly recommend since it came out at the same time as The Road to Serfdom but is far less dated...

[Socialism is] “the tendency inherent in an industrial civilization to transcend the self-regulating market by consciously subordinating it to a democratic society.”

I'm no fan of nationalizing enterprises when such intervention will not necessarily benefit society, but I still consider myself preferring Socialism as expressed by WSI to its counterpart. and telling the IMF to piss off isn't nationalization.
 
MikeyDB
#7
Chukcha
So it was the socialist responsible for launching the industrial revolution right? It's socialist that build more cars than people to be driven on highways that strangle the ability of the earth to recover? It's socialist that drop bombs on children all over the world now is it?
Check your premises I think you're ideas are sliding away.....
 
Chukcha
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDB View Post

Chukcha
So it was the socialist responsible for launching the industrial revolution right? It's socialist that build more cars than people to be driven on highways that strangle the ability of the earth to recover? It's socialist that drop bombs on children all over the world now is it?
Check your premises I think you're ideas are sliding away.....

Not only socialists, offcourse, but like any other ists, ats, etc they are definitely helping people to have the aim for all of the above.
 
MikeyDB
#9
Chkcha
Far to complex for me but a simple man of many years.... expand on that notion for me would you?
 
Chukcha
#10
power in hands of any human will make the world collapse, humans are humans, whether socialists or capitalists, or whoever.
But as long as we have the balance, like, sort of - Good vs Bad, the human world will live forever.
 
MikeyDB
#11
Gotcha....
Nice talking with you.....
 
Chukcha
#12
it was a pleasure too.
ask as many questions as you like
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#13
One for all and all for one etc etc; maybe I'm a bit to idealistic but I do believe that we must embrace socialism, we cannot address the pressing problems of mankind through the capitalist model.
I have capitalist tendencys myself but like disease they must be subject to treatment I cannot be allowed to rape and pillage my nieghbours at will.
I am happy to see you're back Colpy. Extensive brain surgery is routine these days, you're lucky you only use 5% of yours and you won't miss the other 4 grams anyway,hahaha
 
hermanntrude
#14
I dont think anyone (except possibly westmanguy) could argue that capitalism is an inherently good thing. But socialism doesnt seem to be realistic. it doesn't fit in with the systems all around it. Also it's prone to corruption from within, along the lines of killing anyone who's an "enemy of the state". Although come to think of it that applies well to capitalism too.
 
DurkaDurka
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

I have capitalist tendencys myself but like disease they must be subject to treatment I cannot be allowed to rape and pillage my nieghbours at will.

I would suggest seeking treatment at one of the many labour camps in North Korea, perhaps then you could import their Juche ideology to Canada.
 
tbud
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Chukcha View Post

power in hands of any human will make the world collapse, humans are humans, whether socialists or capitalists, or whoever.

We still need some kind of system (unless you advocate anarchy). Socialism puts a bottom line on poverty, meaning there is a safety net below which you can't fall.

Capitalism promotes greed and power over other people, socialism as a political and economic system means a more fair distribution of wealth.

The only way to stop corruption, which is inherent in any system because it comes from human nature, not politics, is to make sure that the common people have a share in power. That's why there is such a thing as social democracy.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

I dont think anyone (except possibly westmanguy) could argue that capitalism is an inherently good thing. But socialism doesnt seem to be realistic. it doesn't fit in with the systems all around it. Also it's prone to corruption from within, along the lines of killing anyone who's an "enemy of the state". Although come to think of it that applies well to capitalism too.


I was reading an essay last night that dealt in part with the tendency of liberals and spongy leftists in general to see socialism as unrealistic.When in fact socialism is far more realistic than pie in the sky pipe dreams sold by capitalism. This tendency to see unrealism in practical solutions offered by socially responsible methods is a result of the conditioning the capitalist system. It's exactly the thinking that has kept social medicine out of the states when the evidence in support of exactly that is overwhelming. Trashing socialism is usually based on brainwashing not facts.
 
BitWhys
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

...Also it's prone to corruption from within...

left to their own devices capitalist entities are just as prone to eating their young. that's the nature of the bureaucratic beast.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#19
I'd go further BitWhyt and say that in the case of something like students loans capitalist actually eat the young while they're still alive an apendage at a time.
 
BitWhys
#20
who you calling whyt?

and I've been out of that game a long time but you probably make a good point.
 
hermanntrude
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

I was reading an essay last night that dealt in part with the tendency of liberals and spongy leftists in general to see socialism as unrealistic.When in fact socialism is far more realistic than pie in the sky pipe dreams sold by capitalism. This tendency to see unrealism in practical solutions offered by socially responsible methods is a result of the conditioning the capitalist system. It's exactly the thinking that has kept social medicine out of the states when the evidence in support of exactly that is overwhelming. Trashing socialism is usually based on brainwashing not facts.

I cant claim to know all the facts, which is why i said it "seems" to be unrealistic. I'm well aware of the conditioning ive been subject to, just not quite sure where it applies and how. Certainly i'm all for social health systems.
 
hermanntrude
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

left to their own devices capitalist entities are just as prone to eating their young. that's the nature of the bureaucratic beast.

Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude

Although come to think of it that applies well to capitalism too.

....
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#23
Humans are animals. Omnivorous scavenger type animals. There are myriads of species of the same type that eat their young (eg, lions, grizzly, several birds, fish, etc.). I haven't tried it yet, myself, though.
The more extreme either socialism or capitalism get the harder they are on people, too. Socialists tend to forget that capitalism makes it possible to make the money to do its socialistic stuff. Even China is finding that out. Capitalists forget that they often shoulder aside or even climb on people less interested in being greedy or are simply unable to be as aggressive as they are.
Perhaps what I said somewhere else here is really applicable: the right have no heart and the left have no brains. And to paraphrase Galbraith; in both socialism and capitalism, humans exploit humans.
 
BitWhys
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

....

perhaps I put too fine a point on it.

sorry bout dat
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Humans are animals. Omnivorous scavenger type animals. There are myriads of species of the same type that eat their young (eg, lions, grizzly, several birds, fish, etc.). I haven't tried it yet, myself, though.
The more extreme either socialism or capitalism get the harder they are on people, too. Socialists tend to forget that capitalism makes it possible to make the money to do its socialistic stuff. Even China is finding that out. Capitalists forget that they often shoulder aside or even climb on people less interested in being greedy or are simply unable to be as aggressive as they are.
Perhaps what I said somewhere else here is really applicable: the right have no heart and the left have no brains. And to paraphrase Galbraith; in both socialism and capitalism, humans exploit humans.

That Galbraith quote needs to be put in context. What system of governance wouldn't exploit people? Exploitation can't be avoided but it can be regulated and humanized.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Humans are animals. Omnivorous scavenger type animals. There are myriads of species of the same type that eat their young (eg, lions, grizzly, several birds, fish, etc.). I haven't tried it yet, myself, though.
The more extreme either socialism or capitalism get the harder they are on people, too. Socialists tend to forget that capitalism makes it possible to make the money to do its socialistic stuff. Even China is finding that out. Capitalists forget that they often shoulder aside or even climb on people less interested in being greedy or are simply unable to be as aggressive as they are.
Perhaps what I said somewhere else here is really applicable: the right have no heart and the left have no brains. And to paraphrase Galbraith; in both socialism and capitalism, humans exploit humans.

That Galbraith quote needs to be put in context. What system of governance wouldn't exploit people? Exploitation can't be avoided but it can be regulated and humanized.Capitalism is not the only way to make a living is it?
 
crit13
#27
Politics and bashing aside, which country would you rather live in....
Socialist countries
Cuba, N. Korea, Venezuela,
Capitalist counries
Canada, Britain, Australia, Europe
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

That Galbraith quote needs to be put in context. What system of governance wouldn't exploit people? Exploitation can't be avoided but it can be regulated and humanized.Capitalism is not the only way to make a living is it?

Perhaps not, but it works for me. (I'm assuming the first question is rhetorical and the second required an answer).
Perhaps everyone should put their money in the gov't pot and trust the gov't? (rhteorical question) I don't think so. The best road is somewhere between the extremes and probably close to the center, kinda like what we have now except with better efficiency, and more care applied to the regulation.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Perhaps not, but it works for me. (I'm assuming the first question is rhetorical and the second required an answer).
Perhaps everyone should put their money in the gov't pot and trust the gov't? (rhteorical question) I don't think so. The best road is somewhere between the extremes and probably close to the center, kinda like what we have now except with better efficiency, and more care applied to the regulation.

I'll agree with your middle idea but we ain't in the middle yet and we have never been. The proposed
SSP deals plainly points out in what direction we're going if we don't act.
 
Northboy
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

One for all and all for one etc etc; maybe I'm a bit to idealistic but I do believe that we must embrace socialism, we cannot address the pressing problems of mankind through the capitalist model.
I have capitalist tendencys myself but like disease they must be subject to treatment I cannot be allowed to rape and pillage my nieghbours at will.
I am happy to see you're back Colpy. Extensive brain surgery is routine these days, you're lucky you only use 5% of yours and you won't miss the other 4 grams anyway,hahaha

What about a democratized commonwealth system where infrastructure as deemed by the People is operated in a public trust to create a level playing field for business and entrepreneurs to create a solid economy for the benefit of all??
 

Similar Threads

8
How to save the world
by I think not | Nov 2nd, 2010
348
7 Ways to Save the World
by I think not | Nov 1st, 2010
496
Socialists in a Panic
by china | Jan 25th, 2010
2
8
The World will Save Iraq from Civil War
by jimmoyer | Mar 18th, 2006