Do you think “Eventually” the Whole World will become Socialist?

by pistolpete 30 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • minimus

    I think believers in socialism want “free” things, bottom line.


    I don’t believe freedom exists. It’s a thing we tell ourselves. In the USA, we have “freedom” to operate within certain boundaries. It’s like operating within the Matrix, it’s just that there is no real world to escape to, unless you want to say that going off the grid and being a survivalist is freedom. Even then your life is affected by so many things that are out of your control, with the ultimate limit being aging and death.

    That being said, it appears that what’s happening now is a bit unprecedented because we have a multi-national group of Globalists pushing a socialist/communist agenda with the backing of Big Tech and the Mainstream/Legacy Media, all backed by China. They want a One World Government and there will be no Middle Class, only tiers of the wealthy and the slaves.

    We are all slaves already, with a bit of room to run around the maze if we are lucky, room to gather more cheese if we want, have a big nest if we can afford it, but we are still not free.

    What’s coming is even worse because essentially a Global Corporation will run everything, own everything and every one, at least those left alive after the next round of lockdowns and the coming depression/vaccinations if Biden is elected and Bill Gates gets his way.

    As the Globalists say, “You will own nothing and you will be happy.”

    These elite f***s want to be Gods. If there is an Anti-Christ and it’s a collective entity then it’s the Globalists.


  • Anna Marina
    Anna Marina

    Communism with a king (maybe I don't know). But not Socialist. You can't vote for Communism. It comes about via history. You have to hit a specific date/time period and boom, you are in power. I think WT has banked on it. Wrong date but nothing a bit of spin wont cure.

    Same old 3-staged theory of progress/pyramidiot ideas from August Comte and Saint Simon.

    Saint-Simon had consistently appealed to monarchial authority from his first petitions to Napoleon until his last appeal for a New Christianity to the leaders of the Holy Alliance.

  • a watcher
    a watcher

    Revelation says we're headed for a communistic world government. Most people have no idea and are not prepared for how bad it's going to get.

  • hoser

    The whole world won’t become socialist. The pendulum swings and now it is swinging left in our part of the world.

  • GodBeliever

    I lived in a communist country. In the beginning they got rid of all the elites (intellectuals and politicians), they banned religion and other ideologies not in line with the state's party. Then they started to raise into power simple and uneducated people loyal to the communist party. Next generation was brainwashed and persuaded that communism is better than capitalism. They portrayed capitalism as ruthless and unfair. They gave people everything for free: housing, schooling, healthcare. Eventually, they run out of money and collapsed. Everything was like a big concentration camp. One in ten people was giving info to the state's security. There was proximity militia in every neighbourhood. There was perfect control. And you will be surprised that the vast majority of people were happy with that situation. The little dissent was easy to silence. Corruption was everywhere. Their biggest problem was money. They were not very good at making anything profitable.

    However, China seems to be the ultimate authoritarian state. Communist leadership powered by capitalist economy. Time will tell.

  • peacefulpete

    First off... and really should not need to be said...every man and woman values "freedom" (tm), therefore the word itself is a common ground. Every person values "freedom", the armies on any side of any war fights for "freedom" in some sense. So when I have discussions about issues like healthcare and taxes I assume my audience values "freedom" as much as I do.

    I will also unhesitatingly say everyone I know, cares about others. So that too is a common ground. Yes, shocking I know, but everyone values basic freedoms and wants to do right by their neighbors. (Rare genuine sociopaths aside). If any discussion can begin, all participants need to pause and recognize those 2 things.

    Next, as another poster said, forms of government are extremely diverse and no two nations have ever struck the same balances or defined terminology identically. Every government is and has been unique, striking different balances and experimenting with best practice toward the same goals. Each different, having strengths and weaknesses as judged by their success facilitating a high quality of life for its people. Pigeon-holing these widely diverse approaches to government into a few broad categories is mental laziness that none of us want to be guilty of that, do we?

    Back to the initial question then; Is true that more of the world's population lives under greater tyranny than previous eras? That is hardly the case. Autocrats today are deemed pariahs by most of the world. Never have common people had as much self determination. So the question really is,.. What have a growing number of people determined to be the best way to promote quality of life, maintain freedom and still do right by their neighbor? The answer.....many have democratically chosen to work as a society to achieve goals to a greater extent than the U.S. Well, maybe that is itself oversimplifying. The people of the US overwhelmingly support a national healthcare program for all Americans not just those over 65. (Polls 60-70% agree). So since even most Americans see the value of changing this failing employer-provided-insurance experiment to a more efficient nationally facilitated program, what is preventing it from happening? Special interest money maybe?

    What's also rather ironic is we already have collective health programs called health insurance. The difference is now we have the added expense of ceos making unprecedented profits with motivation to decline coverage for those who need it. Aside from that aspect, the concept is identical, the costs of insurance is an average of the expenses of the millions insured. Sick people get a break on the actual costs of their care because healthy people are paying more for coverage than they spend. I don't see national health care as some radical break from what we are doing, it's just being done more humanely and efficiently. It is a fact that there is no way to make money insuring sick and elderly so large groups of people agree that they will pay more in premiums to cover them now while also understanding their owns needs may change in the future.

    Consider, when the US revolted and began its experiment in self government, its wisest men looked to the Magna Carta for most of the material for the new nation's own Constitution. To me this was true brilliance, to see the good aspects in even the government you were at war with. We can learn much from other nations and the balances they have struck. I'd like to think America can come up with an even better solution, I hope so. Whatever we do it will be imperfect and whatever we do it will require thinking as a society and has to balance freedoms with doing right by our neighbor.

  • Phizzy

    " I think it was Margaret Thatcher that as many words..."the problem with socialism is..sooner or later you run out of other peoples money ". That is actually an excellent definition of capitalism. LOL

    Democratic Socialism in various forms works well in a number of Countries, often the Government is a Coalition, so not fully Democratic Socialist. But if the U.S were to consider such a Government, or the U.K, or anywhere, to achieve it would mean a system of Proportional Representation, Single Transferable Vote perhaps, but there are other systems.

    Why consider Democratic Socialism ? just look at Portugal, a very poor Country of the E.U. but as soon as they got rid of their Right Wing Austerity wielding Government things have improved immensely, many who had left the Country in disgust at Capitalism unfettered extracting money for the 1%, but investing little in the Country, have started to return. Things are looking up there, just with a change to a weak Democratic Socialism.

    For the US and the U.K to achieve a Government " For The Many, Not The Few", which is what D.S is, both Countries would need a new, real, Green Democratic Socialist Party to emerge, and for P.R to be brought in. In the U.S the Republicans and Democrats must go, in the U.K, the Conservatives and the Labour Party must go.

  • hoser

    I think capitalism on a small level needs to be preserved. Everyone needs the ability to earn an income for themselves and to provide for their family. Not everyone has the ability to work as an employee due to disabilities that the workplace does not make allowances for. Capitalism gives these people an opportunity to thrive.

  • peacefulpete

    Small c capitalism is as old and demonstrably useful as civilization itself. A person earns a living by effort and the products of that effort are valuable. Big C Capitalism is a specific economic theory that often has quasi religious connotations with insistence that markets alone can resolve societies' needs. The various forms of economic models all fall on a spectrum between strict Capitalism and ridged collectivism (sharing of everything). Never has there been a society that wholly dismissed the role of individual efforts to better their means and never has there been a society that wholly dismissed the need for social safety nets.

Share this