Reply With Quote
BobaFett1, voted most likely to be emotionally effected by boutons_deux on this board. dude, just put him on ignore if you don't think he adds any value to the conversation.
I assume you still live in your Moms basement and have not worked for 5 years. Blames Bush for everything.
Dam right you do.
BobaFett1, voted most likely to be emotionally effected by boutons_deux on this board. dude, just put him on ignore if you don't think he adds any value to the conversation.
LOL Boutox adds daily comedy. I thought about putting him on ignore but he is so deranged he is ing hilarious.
I see little difference between Bobafett1 and Boutons IMO
france was home to the world's earliest socialists, ain't it any surprise?
LM and other ignorant bubbas really pissed that Boutons s slaps them every day, all.
Pathetic losers, every one of ya. GFY
who please? French history isn't a strong point for me.
Danton, Robespierre and the Terror? Iean-Jacques Rousseau?
Francois-Noel Babeuf and Rousseau
Also, Frenchman were instrumental is organizing some of the first socialist organizations, such as the International Workingmen's Association
Oh, and I'm a Boutons fan despite disagreeing with a vast majority of what he has to say. He's a big part of what makes the Political board so entertaining
The French Revolution overthrew France's version of their 1%/VRWC, the powerful almalgam of the royalty/landowners + the Catholic church, which dominated for 100s of years. Social democracy in France and Europe and other industrial countries is working better than Darwinian, rigged, predatory capitalism in USA which only "works" the greedy, predatory, criminal 1% and the mega-corps.
It's good to be the 1%.
It must really suck to be you, though.
Without Spurstalk to vent his vitriol Boutox would have probably slit his wrists years ago.
the more you asshole right-wingers are pissed off about The Great Boutons, the more The Great Boutons is affirmed that he's got your goat, you bubba goat- ers.
Nouveau Riche. Embarrassing.
BobaFett1,
I invite you to embarrass yourself even more by giving us your definition of "socialism", right here:
=====
If you accept, less chick , there will be a followup invitation.
Loser. Embarrassing.
And I was just tweaking Boutox. I'm pretty sure I'm not 1% but I'm trying to be.
Irony. It's not for breakfast anymore.
inviting is not dictating, TByou could look it up.
's funny. You never respond to my "invites". lol coward
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post6263744
Feel same way. Nbadan now I never understand his value one bit.
Wow what a highly informative Iq post. Dam you left wingers are so smart.
Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive ins utions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]
A socialist economic system would consist of a system of production and distribution organized to directly satisfy economic demands and human needs, so that goods and services would be produced directly for use instead of for private profit[5] driven by the ac ulation of capital. Accounting would be based on physical quan ies, a common physical magnitude, or a direct measure of labour-time in place of financial calculation.[6][7] Distribution would be based on the principle to each according to his contribution.
As a political movement, socialism includes a diverse array of political philosophies, ranging from reformism to revolutionary socialism. Proponents of state socialism advocate the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange as a strategy for implementing socialism. In contrast, libertarian socialism proposes the traditional view of direct worker's control of the means of production and opposes the use of state power to achieve such an arrangement, opposing both parliamentary politics and state ownership.[citation needed] Democratic socialism seeks to establish socialism through democratic processes and propagate its ideals within the context of a democratic political system.
Modern socialism originated from an 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticised the effects of industrialisation and private property on society. In the early 19th-century, "socialism" referred to any concern for the social problems of capitalism irrespective of the solutions to those problems. However, by the late 19th-century, "socialism" had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for an alternative system based on some form of social ownership.[8] Marxists expanded further on this, attributing scientific assessment and democratic planning as critical elements of socialism.
Follow up invitation:
how does my vehement detestation of and opposition to the Repugs, the 1%, tea baggers, Randians, the financial sector, the MIC, the PIC, etc, etc make me a socialist?
and provide links where I said I wanted to nationalize "the means of production", etc, etc.
Meh... his schtick gets old after a while, tbh...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
