15 reasons why socialism sucks

by Infidelesto on October 16, 2007 · 72 comments

Do you like this story?

If we vote Hillary Clinton into the White House, this is the road we will be going down. PLEASE, PLEASE pay attention to the ideology of Clinton. Gun control, nationalized Health care, more taxes, redistribution of wealth, bigger government. All these things Hillary wants, but do you?

Why does Socialism suck? Here’s just a few reasons…

  1. It’s a system of authoritarian political control
  2. It’s anti-freedom
  3. It’s one step away from communism
  4. Promotes laziness
  5. You own NOTHING while the government owns EVERYTHING
  6. It lets the government tell me what I can and can’t do with my money
  7. Destroys free markets
  8. It’s tyrannical
  9. It’s detrimental to individual liberty
  10. It gives losers/drug addicts/poor/homeless people a free pass
  11. Does not reward hard working individuals
  12. Does not define man as “created equally” but instead “deserves everything equally”
  13. Gives the common man no reason to excel, thrive, succeed at anything.
  14. Nazi Germany/Stalin/Ottoman Empire/China/North Korea/Cuba..need I say more?
  15. If it’s so great, why do Canadians, Cubans, and Europeans flock to America when they need immediate specialized health care? ….. Cause when they need help, they’re told to “Get in line!”

Hillary Clinton is a SOCIALIST. She wants to tax you more, so she can give it back to the “victims” and the “poor” and the “minorities” and the “less fortunate”. This ideology goes directly against what this country was originally founded upon and why we thrived faster than any country in the world in only 200 years. We are free, we take care of our own and we do it the way WE want to do it. We own guns, we keep our own money, we invest, hire, and spend, and ultimately grow exponentially. Capitalism is the greatest thing that could have happened to a young United States 200 years ago. It brought us to the status we have today in this world. A military and economic superpower

Great idea***How bout we keep more of our own money, so we can spend more, hire more, create more, develop more, and let the economy thrive more and more and more.

from socialismsucks.net

Anytime you give to government the responsibility and authority to provide government-made jobs, old-age financial security, “free” health care, and “free” education and indoctrination of children, it will control the lives of the people who live under its jurisdiction, and individual liberty and freedom of choice are sacrificed.

Sure, security is important — but anyone can find security from a prison warden. But, despite socialist promises, bureaucratic programs of the political state cannot guarantee security anyway. Instead the socialist state uses its coercive powers to seize the wealth and properties of those who have earned financial security by their own hands. Socialism does not help poor people; rather, socialism makes people poor so that they have to become dependent on the socialist state and therefore beholden to those in charge of the government.

Socialism is the ultimate exploitative monopoly. No competitors (peaceful market alternatives) are allowed. All major industries, including food, banking, transportation, communication, health care, education, and insurance are owned and operated as state monopolies.

Related posts:

  1. 10 Reasons Why Conservatives are Pissed Off
  2. The Sanction of Evil
  3. You don't get elected by forcing Americans to go to the Doctor
  4. Islamic terrorists officially endorse Hillary Clinton in 08
  5. Dems: Soft on Islamic Terrorism, hard on Capitalism
  • rofw

    sorry, but this is plain stupid, i’m not a socialist, but neither is hillary clinton. from an european view point she’s even right-wing, so, no socialism here.
    and even if she were a socialist, you don’t have any real arguments against the thing itself. E.g. Neither Nazi Germany nor the Ottoman Empire were socialist, or, (another e.g.) no sane European would ever go to the US for health care, you don
    ‘t have any proof (and I strongly believe that there is any) that the american health care system is only the tiniest bit better than the european one. Also, in a socialist system (one that earned it’s name that is) you still DO have private property. Let me ask you: what has the “American Dream” ever done for the common man? Sure some people go from dishwasher to millionaire, but that’s a minority, the rest of the people is exploited by big corporations with the great “American Dream” as a carrot to keep the donkey moving. Socialism is all about solidarity of the people whereas the capitalist pseudo-democratic system of the U.S (and of Europe too, for that matter) is a struggle of the people against each other. Maybe you want to consider what you’ve written and don’t let yourself be blinded by the (your) ridiculous and evil ideology you’ve been force-fed and that will just lead you to the slaughterhouse (to stay in the analogy). And about the guns: you can keep them, go ahead, shoot each other if you want, I’m glad I live in a peaceful country (Germany) where there’s a ban on assault weapons and where less people are murdered in a year than in any major city of the U.S..

  • Pingback: 15 reasons why socialism sucks | Political news - democrats republicans socialists greens liberals conservatives

  • Infidelesto

    I have news for you…everything Hillary has ever tried to push politically has been baby steps towards a more socialistic America. WTF do you think nationalized health care is? Wake up!

    Nazi Germany wasn’t socialist? let me educate you.

    Do you even know what Hitler’s political party’s full name is? It was shortened to Nazi from Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter-Partei (National SOCIALIST German Worker’s Party). Nazi’s and socialists are not opposite ends of the political spectrum. they are both on the same

    As for the rest of your mindless rant, I’m too bored already to keep lecturing you.

    • Dee

      my friend Nazi's are only socilaist in name, not in nature. i'm sure you know the definition of socialism, so i wont patronise you by asking what socialist ideaology the nazi party had.

      also it must be noted that because of the apparent link of socialism with the nazis and the tyranny of animals like stalin and mao, it gives the outlook on socialism an evil tint. but let's think about the evil of capitalism…. the afghan war, iraq, vietnam, the dresden fúck up, how many wars have been started by imperial powers just so the can control wealth and oil etc ??

      and just because someone wants nationalised health care, how in hell does that make them a socialist ? you're very good at spreading fear and bullshit. maybe people want to introduce some aspects of socilaism in society because it is the right thing to do, is more more fairer, less oppressive and less exploitation occurs.

      i think you may need educated on the meaning of the word (socialism), because all you are spreading here is fear and a lack of understanding.

      • Ana

        Saying nazis = not socialists is like saying terrorists = not muslims

        • MDU

          I hope thats a joke.
          I’ts funny cos it’s true

          • SirWilhelm

            No, not all Muslims are terrorists, the ones that aren’t terrorists spread Islam through dawa, is that funny, or true? And Islam is just like Socialism, because they both re-distribute the wealth, so that the masses wind up poor, and the elites have all the money, and power. In Islam, it’s the shieks and imans. And both Islam and Socialism see Amercia and Israel as enemies, because they are the last bastions of freedom in the world. No joke.

          • Sugarsail1

            yup , Western socialists and Muslims are strange bedfellows but bedfellows never the less. All one has to do is look at Muslim countries for the last 1000 years. They are largely illiterate, corrupt, breed too much, and economically and technologically backwards in every possible way…and it all starts with values and ideals.

      • Sugarsail1

        hogwash…you bought the liberal brainwashing that tries to distance fascism from modern day liberalism…look at the government programs and economics of Mussolini and Hitler, they are nearly identical to modern day liberalism. You also confuse free-market capitalism with militarism…they are not the same thing. Hitler was nationalist militaristic and socialist the worst of both the political right and left in our present time. Free-enterprise and capitalism has been the ONLY thing that has led the human race to self-betterment and technological development and that is a historical fact going back 10,000 years or more.

        • SirWilhelm

          Well said!

      • SirWilhelm
  • wtfpwnt

    I agree with rofw. And it’s obvious that the real agenda is to bad mouth Hillary, so i don’t see any real reason to compare it with socialism when there is obviously flaws in any presidential candidates views. I agree with Infedelesto with the NAZIs being a socialist party, but do not see any valuable reason how that supports any argument unless this post was just a history lesson.

    • tiny tim

      are you stupid???

    • Tonto

      wtfpwnt, I have a hammer in my toolbox that has more brains than to say something as idiotic as that. Are you a registered moron?? And hey, if you haven’t figured out that Hitlery, Bill Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Franks, Holder, Waters and a whole bunch of democraps are actually socialists by now, you’re just plain stupid.

  • Noel King

    Right on the money. Many people do not understand the idea of “choice” and would rather force people into helping others.

    While the idea of helping others is positive but forcing someone to do anything never yields in positive results – it’s psychological that people will resist when told to do something.

    Charities still exist (even in social societies) to help the needy. Charities can be better operated to make sure that those who want help get it and those who want a free ride are quickly, upon realizing their motives, discarded.

    Socialism is about holding someones hand for life and telling them how to live. It does not promote the idea of independence. It’s basically like living under your parents roof until they die – when they die, who will take care of you? You never learned and were always comforted.

    Hell, Buddha walked away from that life.

    • Juan

      well you gotta say a child how to behave, right? same with morons

  • http://www.zhann.com zhann

    It is important to acknowledge the difference between a socialist government and socialist institutions. The problem is that when people hear the word socialism they immediately relate it to “In Soviet Russia, the government owns you”. The fact is, Socialism is all around us. Most European countries have been led by Socialist rulers for some time now, all elected by the people. Socialism is inherent throughout the USA as well; the Public School Systems, Unemployment Benefits, Social Security, Police, Fire Department … even the Army can be considered a Socialist institution (this can be debated, of course, but it fits the principles).

    • http://www.facebook.com/javier.cabrera.5209 Javier Cabrera

      this is true, we owe most of the things we hold as “rights” to socialist movements. The 8 hour day, voting for women and blacks, limit to age for work, etc etc.

  • http://www.myspace.com/ikeik ikiek

    I’m not sure if Zhann is European, or just doesn’t get it, but the very fact that socialism is a European intuition is enough reason to reject it; at least according to most Americans.
    We are AMERICANS.  We are not Europeans.  Our ancestors left Europe and every other continent on the planet (aside from Antarctica), for the purpose of finding a better life in America.  That says something about our ancestors.  They were a hearty, self-reliant, independent group of individuals…much like the “silent majority” of the United States today.  We don’t need or want the handouts, pandering or hand-holding of a socialist state…OR socialist institutions.
    The very institutions you mention as socialist are largely the very ones which those of us in the “silent majority” wish to overturn.  We don’t want the current mandated public school system, welfare, or an un-indexed Social Security Insurance system.  We don’t want it…and we don’t need it.
    Unlike Europeans and socialist state wards, when we’re down, we pick ourselves up.  When we make a mistake, we take ownership of that mistake, learn from it, and move on.  We endure.  We learn.  We grow.  Most importantly…we improve.  No life form, species, person or society, will ever advance as part of an imposed environment of apathy and outward-reliance; the very environment created by a socialist state, which serves only to remove free-will, liberty and independence from its constituent citizenry.
    Or to put it more succinctly…
    Socialism Sucks!  Kiss my capitalistic American ass!
    Oh…and “Have a nice day!” from the U.S. of A!!

  • Storm-Rider

    Socialism is simply this: it is elite political power which does not derive from the consent of the governed; it is government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite.

    “The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.” Thomas Jefferson

    “I declared to them point-blank: we have received our mandate as the representatives of the proletarian party from no one but ourselves.” Karl Marx

    “The method of engaging in trifles at public meetings and doing real business on the quiet justified itself brilliantly.” Friedrich Engels

    “It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” Joseph Stalin

    I believe we have to roll back the “New Deal” which ushered in American Socialism in 1933. The “New Deal” is a bad deal, and it is unconstitutional, because it violates the tenth amendment by concentrating political power in Washington D.C. Power corrupts unless it comes from the people. The “New Deal” also depends on Supreme Court judicial activism, i.e.: legislation from the bench. Many Supreme Court decisions have violated the Constitution and supported elitist agendas (Judicial Activism), but who can override a Supreme Court decision? The Supreme Court grabbed their power of judicial review in 1803 with the Marbury vs. Madison case. The Constitution does not give the Supreme Court a veto power over Congressional Legislation, but they took such power by their own decree. I’m not against the Supreme Court having a veto, but the people of the United States should decide this by amending the Constitution. While we’re at it, the amendment should also provide for Congress to override a Supreme Court veto just as the Congress can override a Presidential veto, and it should provide term limits for Supreme Court Justices as well as for Congress. Power corrupts unless it comes from the people.

    “When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated….” Thomas Jefferson

    Here is a quotation from Garet Garett who studied American Socialism as it developed in the 1930’s, and also a link to his essay.

    “There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs to freedom. So it was that a revolution took place within the form. Like the hagfish, the New Deal entered the old form and devoured its meaning from within. The revolutionaries were inside; the defenders were outside. A government that had been supported by the people and so controlled by the people became one that supported the people and so controlled them….. In the welfare state the government undertakes to see to it that the individual shall be housed and clothed and fed according to a statistical social standard, and that he shall be properly employed and entertained, and in consideration for this security the individual accepts in place of entire freedom a status and a number and submits his life to be minded and directed by an all-responsible government.” Garet Garett


    “You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges … and their power are the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves….When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves….” Thomas Jefferson

    “At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.” Thomas Jefferson

    “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.” Abraham Lincoln

    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln

  • http://www.myspace.com/ikeik Chris Spires

    Storm-Rider is breaking out the Jefferson quotes…watch out socialists! 

    The people needed revolution to reapply Constitutional controls over the government years before most of us were born.  With our centers of higher education doing little to teach a true constitutional view of our nation, the current generations are as far removed from a sense of true American spirit, as a Dark Age peasant from the glories of the Roman citizen. 

    Still there are those who spy the light of Reason and Liberty through even the darkest veil of tyranny.

  • Storm-Rider

    I despise the American Left; and their Big Brother, the European Left. Their leaders are Marxists – their leaders are Communists – and they now control much of our mass media and academia. We have several Marxists on our Supreme Court, and in the leadership of the Democrat Party. The Marxist Left is very powerful – they are our near enemy.

    The European and American Marxist Left is the old European Right. Those who would gravitate toward Monarchy, Empire or Fascist Dictatorship have no place to go except the Marxist Left, because there is no Fascist Right to go to. What’s a Brown Shirt to do? Brown Shirts turn Red – that is where unjust and tyrannical political power now resides.

    There has never been a significant “Right” in the United States – from the beginning in 1776 we have been and remain the anti-Right. There is only the American Marxist Left who do not believe in government power deriving from the consent of the governed, and ordinary Americans who do believe so. As I see it there is a trilateral worldwide struggle for power: Marxist Left, Islamo-Fascist and American. These are all revolutionary movements: The Communist Revolution, The Islamist Revolution and The American Revolution.

    The Communist Revolution is not over, nor the Islamist Revolution. The latter dates back to the seventh century and is just as powerful, if not more so than the Communist Revolution. The Islamo-Fascists are clearly on the comeback after centuries of decline.

    Lastly there is the American Revolution. Anyone who believes that the American Revolution is something to read about in history books is a fool. The American Revolution is not over – we have two powerful Revolutionary movements who are at our throats. The Communist Revolutionaries are in an alliance of convenience with the Islamist Revolutionaries; and their first goal is the defeat of the American Revolution. Our American Revolution is for God-given Life, Liberty and creative Pursuit of Happiness. Both the Communist and Islamist Revolutions are for the opposite: Murder, Subjugation, and Destructive Pursuit of Raw Political Power. Our American Revolution recognizes just government power only deriving from the consent of the governed, whereas the Communist and Islamo-Fascist Revolution only recognizes a raw animal will to power.

    The American Revolution is not over. At some point in the future we must awaken to the fact that we are revolutionaries ourselves, and that we are at war for the survival of human liberty – that we are struggling so that government of the people, by the people and for the people does not perish from the earth. Never forget – our Declaration of Independence is a declaration of war – an eternal declaration of war against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

    “I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” Thomas Jefferson

    “It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Abraham Lincoln

    • VultureTX

      Didn’t Lincoln say that about the “Civil” war?

      I think you have read to much about American history and not enough of world history. European left is American left? Sheesh

  • Socialism sucks

    I totally agree with whoever wrote this. Socialism SUCKS. No one could ever create a utopian society because not everyone would be willing. If you were say a doctor and you had to work from say 7 pm until 7 am and got paid the same as someone who just sat on their ass like a food credict wouldnt you be ed. come on now dumb asses SOCIALISM IS STUPID


      Socialims sucks,but its followers are even worse!

      They are the most ARROGANT bunch of them all.They NEVER
      admit being wrong,even with rock solid evidence proving that
      socialism brings FAILURE to any country who adopted as an
      economical policy.

      See CUBA.What a WASTE !! Even TOILET PAPER they don't

      • VultureTX

         Cuba isn’t a good example since the Soviets gave them 10 billion a year. They have fallen pretty hard since that ended. Plus they are Communists, not socialists.

  • Peter Bronowicki

    I'm amazed how many people have an erroneous definition of socialism. It took many web sites to finally find a correct one. Thanks for your input.

  • cool_infidel

    You are completely correct on all fronts. And it's time we all united to fight communism. Obama administration for a start:

    and the sinister radical communist groups that obama and his associates are affiliated with i.e STORM: http://web.archive.org/web/20070719020533/http:…

    millions of people died in the struggle to fight against communist regimes. But the marxists have made a comeback and are infiltrating both the politics of the U.S and Europe. keep up the good work of creating awareness.

    • VultureTX

       What millions died fighting communism?

  • Bobby

    I agree with virtually all the points you make about Hillary Clinton. That being said I would actually prefer her over the hard core doctrinaire socialist that now inhabits the White House. A substantial majority of the American people still fervently believe in what has made America unique and wildly prosperous. That would be a paramount importance placed on individual liberty and freedom and limited power of federal government over the lives of American citizens. We now have the absolute antithesis of that philosophy in power. The American people, despite the failure of responsibility by our mainstream fawning sycophantic media, are aware of the danger that the socialist lust for power represents to our great free republic, and the people will preserve their liberty and freedom and ulitmately persevere.

    • Standing Tall

      It's time that Americans stand up and say that we have had the best and want to continue to have the best. We would not be in the shape we are in now if true free market capitalism had prevailed, but instead the government failed us by loaning money to people that everyone knew could not pay it back That's the work of our “Socialist wanna be government” who is trying to sink America in order to scare the general public into thinking the capitalism failed so that the “fearful” will hand over their rights to keep food on the table and a roof over their head. Also, if you contributed to the drinking of the cool aid by borrowing more money than you could afford you can't blame anything but the government and yourself… Americans need to stand while we are still free or we are going to be puppets lead by a one world government.

      We have had it made. If you are a weird left wing radical hippie wake up!

      • VultureTX

        Free markets and Capitalism can’t co-exist.

  • Does it Matter?

    First off most of your 15 points are pointless repetition. Of the Points mentioned only maybe 4 have any valid input, into a converstaion such as this. Points 10-13 can be amaglated into one, as can #s 2, 8 and 9. 3 and 14 may actually contradict each other as Hitler was Facist not Communist, and he actually took over the Nazi party and steered it in a new direction while keeping the name for relative purposes. Point 1 is a definiton not a reason in itself. Point 15 is true for immediate health care, but the countries do not follow your other points, otherwise they would not be able to go seek healthcare elsewhere. If Hillary Clinton is socialist, then the world is obviously coming to an end. And as for 'Economic Superpower' the United States owes $12 trillion. Capitalism has only ever fueled a culture of excess. And The USA was not a world superpower until 1946

    • Storm_Rider

      NAZI derives from the German “Nationalsozialismus” and means “National Socialism” which means leftist nationalization of the individual and his/her rights to private property (pursuit of happiness), liberty and life. Nazism and Fascism use the mechanism of State control of enterprise – State control of individual property and business involved in the means of production. Communism is a bit further to the left than Nazism/Fascism and uses the mechanism of State ownership of individual property and business. State control is tantamount to State ownership; therefore Nazism and Fascism are tantamount to Communism. The Nazi wars of aggression and the concentration camps correlate with Communist wars of aggression and the gulag.

      This video explains what “Left” and “Right” really mean; Left means State control (criminal government) and Right means control by criminals (Anarchy), and it shows where the American Revolution fits in. Unfortunately America has been contaminated by both un-Constitutional Federal Government control (Fascism) and un-Constitutional Federal Government ownership.


      • Storm_Rider

        My last sentence should read:

        Unfortunately America has been contaminated by both un-Constitutional Federal Government control (Fascist Socialism) and un-Constitutional Federal Government ownership (Marxist Socialism).

        • VultureTX

          Tea party much?

      • Does it Matter?

        The video makes a few fair points, but the Old west example was rather ironic. Can anyone actually imagine the frontiersmen bothering with legal niceties? We are talking about a mob chasing down one person. If 35 people wish to kill someone then they will succeed, regardless of whatever law enforcer. Plus the video has been written by someone with a very specific view on history. Several Monarchies were ruled strictly by one person, until King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta, and even then there were monarchies that were only ever ruled by one person. I will however retract the Nazi comment. And I love when people bring up un-constitutional Federal American Government. The National Bank, better known as the department of the treasury and the federal resverve, was never outlined in the constituion, and therefore by the un-constitutional arguement, America truly has no power to create or store a currency.
        By the way it is nice to meet someone whom has an interesting style to their writing, and excellent information

  • Does it Matter?

    The video makes a few fair points, but the Old west example was rather ironic. Can anyone actually imagine the frontiersmen bothering with legal niceties? We are talking about a mob chasing down one person. If 35 people wish to kill someone then they will succeed, regardless of whatever law enforcer. Plus the video has been written by someone with a very specific view on history. Several Monarchies were ruled strictly by one person, until King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta, and even then there were monarchies that were only ever ruled by one person. I will however retract the Nazi comment. And I love when people bring up un-constitutional Federal American Government. The National Bank, better known as the department of the treasury and the federal resverve, was never outlined in the constituion, and therefore by the un-constitutional arguement, America truly has no power to create or store a currency.
    By the way it is nice to meet someone whom has an interesting style to their writing, and excellent information

  • Joe the American

    What a joke this article turned out to be, “if we vote Hillary Clinton into The White House…” as it turns out Barry Hussein Obama is 100x worse than Billary was!!

    • http://infidelsarecool.com Infidelesto

      That's true Joe, At the time Obama wasn't in the picture and look how much
      worse he's been than she ever would be. I used to despise Hillary, and I
      still do to a certain extent, however she nowhere nears the ideological
      radicalism of Obama.

      • VultureTX

        Trying to get health care for everyone makes him a radical? I guess I’m a radical, because I believe the government should provide for its citizens, not just its business men.

  • jeffery

    lol….wtf nazi germany wasn't socialist in any way, more like an exaggerated corrupt capitalistic government

    • http://infidelsarecool.com Infidelesto

      nazi germany wasn't socialist in any way

      are you THAT much of an idiot as to be incapable of reading an ounce of

      “The German Workers' Party name was changed by Hitler to include the term
      National Socialist. Thus the full name was the National Socialist German
      Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or* *NSDAP)
      called for short, Nazi.”

      Hitler was an avowed socialist, but he was also a racist, he only wanted
      socialism for Germans, nobody else, something that's contradictory to the
      ideals of socialism.

      I swear moron's like you should be sent back to kindergarten…

      • VultureTX

        Nazi Germany was a form of Fascism, not Socialism, names don’t necessarily convey the true meaning. See the Lord’s Resistance Army.  

      • http://www.facebook.com/javier.cabrera.5209 Javier Cabrera

        and that is why he persecuted socialists/communists/and union workers… get your facts straight before you start throwing words around

        • SirWilhelm

          Socialist/Communist union workers were rivals for power, with Hitler and the Nazis, in Germany, just as the Soviet Union and China vied for supremecy over the Communist world during the Cold War. Socialist/Fascist Germany fought with the Communist Soviet Union for supremecy. Fascism is another form of Socialism, which we now call State Capitalism, a system the Chinese Communists adopted, ironically enough, to save their collapsing economy. The bottom line for all these different names for Socialism, is that they require the power of government to control the re-distribution of wealth. They differ only in the details, otherwise.

  • Fawkes

    WRONG!!!!!!!!! none of your points are correct so please think for once an a while

  • Tikisniffer69

    wow you really are not educated, to compare socialism to communism is simply put stupid, the dutch,swiss,English, Germans , French, Fins, Swedish, Fins, and Nors have been doing it for years, It’s called a Social Democracy, which means ya get to vote.

    • Hellosnackbar

      True enough Tiki;but the evidence now points to socialism as a failed system.
      As a former National Health contractor I used to believe in the NHS.
      Then of course medical men were replaced by halfwit (medically unqualified administrators) who complicated the system to the point of madness with their silly bureaucratic dogma not to mention further interference by dimwit labour politicians.
      The NHS is no longer a system whose purpose is to look after the health needs of the nation;but an employment sponge to provide jobs for useless pen pushers whose employment has become more important(due to socialist political dogma)than its primary purpose.
      Like Muslims, socialists cling to their beliefs despite evidence to the contrary.
      The failure of socialism was exposed in the fifties by Prof C Northcote Parkinson with his statement:in a bureaucratic world work expands to fill the time available.
      I bought a copy of this humourous exposition of daft and costly principles for my son who couldn’t believe that its common sense lampooning was never taken seriously.
      It’s called Parkinson’s law buy it and learn the truth!

      • VultureTX

        Let’s see, the Western countries have run up how much debt? How many trillions? Some would say they have failed as well. So perhaps a blending of the three systems would work.

  • Think before you speak

    You’re a moron and you should probably research socialism and capitalism before you create a reactionary and inflammatory post.
    Do you believe that everything should be left to ‘the market’ which time after time has proved that it does NOT promote competition but rather gradually funnels money towards an ever smaller -and for lack of a better word- cartel of multi-national corporations. Corporations which actively avoid tax (I know this because in Britain the super rich illegally avoid paying £25 billion every year) and have frequently been shown to exploit and corrupt all nations with the goal of maximising profit for a miniscule number of shareholders.
    If you can prove to me that this system is somehow fairer, more efficient and humane than a socialist one then I will gracefully bow out of this argument.

    However I expect that you will reply with yet another uninformed response, laden with poorly directed emotion which neither deals with my argument nor explains your own.

    • Beejj

      I am not a political expert (who is?) but I know that wherever Socialism has been attempted it has failed. Do you think YOU could make it work? What would you do differently? (Please don’t try to tell me it has worked in Sweden.)

      • VultureTX

        Are you Swedish?

    • Hellosnackbar

      You’re the moron full of the ideology you’ve been fed.
      Socialism is a failure as evedenced by failed socialist countries.
      Instead of your multi national corporations(who provide useful employment) one has bone headed public sector bureaucrats taxing wealth creators to death to redistribute wealth to themselves first.
      Then in accordance with Parkinson’s law they bloat their own departments of paper shufflers in order to
      boost their position of seniority.(more theft from the wealth creators)
      A relative of mine(a science graduate) left his research job to work as an hospital administrator(more money)

      What sort of madness is that?
      Socialists are people with nothing and want to share it with everyone else.

  • Blackwaterdwk

    I bet that half the people commenting on this don’t even know what socialism is and probably never read any philosophical piece about capitalism or socialism. You probably think Clifford the Big Red Dog is a socialist piece of propoganda just because the dog is red.

    • SirWilhelm

      It’s really very simple. There is one principle that Progressivism, Socialism, Communism, and Marxism all have in common, the re-distribution of wealth by the government. They differ only in the details of how they do it. And capitalism is about individuals making money as best they can, legally, and being allowed to keep most of it, although the government still takes it’s share, with the consent of the governed. And, I’m shocked! You mean Clifford the Big Red Dog isn’t a “socialist piece of propaganda”? But then, I thought red was the color adopted by the Communist brand of Marxist Socialism. And they got it from the Jacobin revolutionaries who used it as their revolutionary flag in 1848, it was the color of the blood they knew would be spilled in their revolution. That’s how the Marxist and Communist versions of Socialism expected to be spread, by revolution, and the spilling of blood, and they were. And they spilled more blood staying in power. Obama’s Progressive/Socialism is avoiding bloodshed, and red flags, so far. I apologize about being wrong about Clifford, and I hope I answered the rest of your question satisfactorily. Any more bets?

      • VultureTX

        A lot of those Capitalist make money by ripping other people off in new and varied ways.

        • SirWilhelm

          Once again you display your ignorance. Capitalism is about making a profit, legally. Ripping people off, is theft, it’s illegal. There’s nothing new or varied about ignorant people confusing the two.

          • VultureTX

            Sorry, we have a term like ripping off instead of theft because it isn’t illegal, but not so moral. Big difference. Is your morality based on a law or what you consider right or wrong.

    • Jake

      According to Princeton, Socialism is a “political theory advocating state ownership of industry.” I am currently researching whether or not Socialism is the from of government that the United States should adapt. Ive come to the conclusion that we need to either;
      A) Completely overhaul all US socialist programs into individualized help systems, or
      B) Abolish them as a whole
      all current socialist programs are in shambles, needing something to be done.

      For all you capitalist nay sayers that preach, “Well without socialism, we wouldn’t have the police, jails, the military, schools, or even parks!” To that I say look at the definitions and tell me that these programs are socialist. Socialism is a “political theory advocating state ownership of INDUSTRY”. Industry is described as “the organized action of making of goods and services for SALE,” also according to Princeton. Now tell me, what are the Police selling? How bout jails? Or even schools? They arn’t for profit organizations, thus cannot be socialist if owned by the government. However, previously existing private programs bought out by the government have a record of failure. Look at the post office, look at SSI, Medicare, Medicaid, and the public schools. Damn near broke. Government involvement destroys industry, not help it. The government”s job, and only job, is to make sure that the people and their constitutional rights are being safe. (Military)

      “He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither”
      –Ben Franklin

      • VultureTX

        Quote Fail! He said “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. 

        You should go study some more Jake, providing medical care for everyone isn’t socialism.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YR2RM5BXYR6J2VGL6AMPXJVUWY Jacob P

    You forget a few things. First, it creates poverty and keep those poor people dependent of it for generations. It creates heavy bureaucratic systems and an intrusive and micromanaging government. Country loses ability to compete in the international market, thus private sector is suffocated slowly. Wasteful and mismanagement of resources is also a prevalent trademark of socialism. No private competition leads to no innovation and improvement in the long run.

    • VultureTX

      Strange, the US has poverty and a heavy bureaucracy, but isn’t considered socialistic.  So it begs the question what’s the difference? 

  • Flyland

    at Infidelesto
    Yes nazi germany was a socialist state. Do you know what “nazi” means stupid gay ? NAtional soZIalist.You can believe me, i know what is socialism cause i live in a commi country called france … people are lazy, they never work, they are paid by the state for doing nothing, rich people can pay more than 50% of their income, if you’ve got a goob car people will jest it and offend you, because they are coward and jalous, in france, you con’t fire a lazy workers, you can’t make whatever you want, french big firms rules by the state …. the state is eveywhere… there are too much taxes … socialist land are like the hell, believe me !

    • VultureTX

      Is France communist or socialist?  You jump around there a little to much for me to follow.

  • VultureTX

    I think the author of this article is confused with a few of the terms.

  • Juan

    you are all about money dont you?pathetic

  • Graham Smith

    Socialism in it’s purest form is not a bad thing. It’s the greedy human that screws everything up.  People are afraid someone will get what they don’t have.  I’ll take one example you gave…how about people on drugs getting a free ride? Have you ever thought about the possibility that maybe FAR fewer people would NOT be abusing drugs if they led a much happier life? If their need were taken care of by the entire civilization? We need to think more along these lines. It’s not “me, me, me” it is all of us together.  “Me, me, me” isn’t working as it promotes greed and selfishness and competition of resources. I believe it is out birthright on this planet to have all our basic needs taken care of – we should ALL help each other.

    • Beejj

      And where, pray, has Socialism ‘in its purest form’ ever existed on this planet?

  • Cmgillespie

    I could not agree more! Look at England….Poor Health Care… money given to families who indulge in having 6 or 10 children, while honest and hard working people can’t even have one, because they simply can’t afford it.It is just a recipe for dependency, making people lazy, and worst -because they loose all sense of worth- they startd “demanding” it.Self- suffiency is the way forward,because you do not have to answer any questions to anybody but yourself!

  • http://campusmartiuschronicle.blogspot.com/ Sean Anthony

    I am not a socialist, but this author does not appear to have done his homework. Did anyone else think they just sort of spouting of incoherent drivel? Who is this person!?

  • FreedomFromIgnorance

    I hate socialism, but it hardly gives “the poor” and “drug addicts” a “free pass”. Not to mention, being poor or a drug addict is not something that people always choose.