Philosophy Now Forum

For you, the day Kaiser graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 12:28 am Let's face it, he's used his position to persue his career as a sexual predator, ...He's pretending victimhood. He's not the victim.

I wasn't saying he is any kind of victim, of course. He's not. But he is a Leftist -- in fact, the darling of the Democrat Party, until recently -- and he does believe in "cancel culture."

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:21 pm

tillingborn wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:16 pmHave a long hard think, Immanuel Can; when did you start using the term "cancel culture"?

Maybe I picked it up from Andrew Cuomo.

Why did you wait until Cuomo was accused of being a sexual predator to agree with him? This 'cancel culture' thing is laughable. If you look at the history of cancel culture; from the Catholic Index, the burning of witches, unions, music, books and films that have been banned, to suggest that whiney little left wing busy bodies have a monopoly on being censorious is to cancel reality. You are completely immersed in a right wing echo chamber that cancels anything it doesn't like - you are doing it right now - that little brain of yours is putting the lid on the previous paragraph and intends to carry on as if it never happened.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:02 pm Well, no wonder.

Venezuela? Cuba? I'd just love to know what "particulars" you have from those examples to show the wonders of Socialism. Please, do go on...

Doesn't look like you need me for any of this.

You a knee-jerking and you don't even need the reflex hammer.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:19 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 10:45 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:54 am Nope. Like our PBS (among other things), the BBC and NHS are publicly supported for but not publicly controlled.

Taxpayers foot the bill, but someone else calls the shots.

If that's the grounds on which you dismiss the example as "that's not socialism" , then none of your favourites (Cuba, Venezuela, USSR, Vietnam, North Korea, China etc.) were socialist.

Least you want to explain to us how exactly the average joe in any of those hellholes was "calling the shots".

*If "public control" is a necessary property of socialism then there never have been any socialist countries. Ever. You know... "That's wasn't true socialism"

*You mebbe want read the exchange again cuz you got it all backwards.

Great advice. Try applying it.

You are dismissing the BBC and NHS as being examples of "socialism" because taxpayers aren't calling the shots.

Seeming as your very own conception/definition of "socialism" necessitates that the taxpayers must be calling the shots, please point out any country in which that has actually happened?

That would be precisely the kind of "socialism" you have in mind. No?

Were the taxpayers calling the shots in USSR, Cuba, North Korea and Vietnam?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:54 pmCan a *person decline to pay the fees or taxes funding the BBC and NHS?

If you don't have a TV, you don't have to pay for the BBC, but you can't have a TV and not pay for the BBC. It's a bit of an anomaly that the license that funds the BBC is technically to operate that dangerous box in the corner of the room. As for the NHS, if you need it for any reason, you are going to get it and anyone who has the means to contribute is expected to do so. Those contributions also pay for your state pension, which will last for as long as you live, and all for less than typical insurance premiums in the US. Your options for avoiding paying are to earn less than the threshold, or so much that your bank is in the Cayman Islands.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:54 pm*Brit? Britisher? What's the proper term?

God's favourite. Nah, Brit is just fine.

You are dismissing the BBC and NHS as being examples of "socialism" because taxpayers aren't calling the shots.

Nope. Read it again.


Seeming as your very own conception/definition of "socialism"...

Please, cite for me my own conception/definition of socialism, from this or any thread.

I friggin' dare you.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 2:42 pm [b{You are dismissing the BBC and NHS as being examples of "socialism" because taxpayers aren't calling the shots.[/b]

Nope. Read it again.

Here you go darling...

Social ownership of the means production being the commonly-understood meaning of "socialism" you rejected the example because the BBC and NHS were not "owned by the public".

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:54 am the BBC and NHS are publicly owned

Nope. Like our PBS (among other things), the BBC and NHS are publicly supported for but not publicly controlled.

If you don't have a TV, you don't have to pay for the BBC, but you can't have a TV and not pay for the BBC.

Here, I can buy a tv, hook it to an an aerial, watch myself some broadcast signal; or, I can subscribe to one of several cable providers -- each offerin' a number of different packages -- and watch myself some hard line signal; or, if I wanna be state of the art, I can subscribe to one or more of several streaming services and watch me some net signal.

All the licensing and taxation is on the content provider (which is a crap deal, by the way), not me (though I eat some if it as it's passed on, showing up on my bill). My awful, over-powered, under-disciplined, gov is (uncharacteristically) silent on my ownership and use of the boob tube.


As for the NHS, if you need it for any reason, you are going to get it

Our charity hospital system served that purpose till gov decided to muck around with it. Now we have the ACA.


anyone who has the means to contribute is expected to do so.

Yeah, we have a voluntary system of contribution too.


Those contributions also pay for your state pension, which will last for as long as you live, and all for less than typical insurance premiums in the US.

Does your state pension work as well as our social security does?


Your options for avoiding paying are to earn less than the threshold, or so much that your bank is in the Cayman Islands.

That's your legal option, yeah.


God's favourite. Nah, Brit is just fine.

Social ownership of the means production being the commonly-understood meaning of "socialism" you rejected the example because the BBC and NHS were not "owned by the public".

Nope. Wrong again. I never agreed to that definition. In fact, I've asked several times, in-thread, for definitions, from you, from Advocate, cuz, as I've obliquely pointed out, no one seems to agree on what the damn word actually means.

Me, I used a different "s" word in my exchange (and a "t" word).

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 3:17 pm Nope. Wrong again. I never agreed to that definition.

And yet you are dismissing examples based on some understanding of what socialism is and isn't.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 3:17 pm In fact, I've asked several times, in-thread, for definitions, from you, from Advocate, cuz, as I've obliquely pointed out, no one seems to agree on what the damn word actually means.

I'll happily use the normative definition that you have in mind from which you are asserting that any particular example is "not socialism"

I missed this one...

OK... if the criterion for "socialism" is owning the means of production and "people having a say", then the USA is a socialist country.

Is that your definition?

It's not mine.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 3:53 pm I missed this one...

OK... if the criterion for "socialism" is owning the means of production and "people having a say", then the USA is a socialist country.

Is that your definition?

It's not mine.

So then why did you dismiss the BBC and HNS with "because taxpayers aren't calling the shots."?

It seems whatever your definition of "socialism" you deem it necessary that taxpayers must be calling the shots. Otherwise it's not socialism.

And yet you are dismissing examples based on some understanding of what socialism is and isn't.

Nope. Wrong...again.

I'll happily use the normative definition that you have in mind from which you are asserting that any particular example is "not socialism"

You must be confusin' me with some one else cuz I haven't dismissed anything as not socialism.

In fact, in this thread, as far back as you wanna go, I've only asked for definitions of the word and I've lambasted slavery.

That's the whole of my contribution.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 4:01 pm And yet you are dismissing examples based on some understanding of what socialism is and isn't.

Nope. Wrong...again.

I'll happily use the normative definition that you have in mind from which you are asserting that any particular example is "not socialism"

You must be confusin' me with some one else cuz I haven't dismissed anything as not socialism.

So you are having memory problems now?

Did you forget that you dismissed the BBC and HNS as being publicly owned?

And you objected to the claim of "public ownership" because the taxpayers had no say.

Did that happen or not?