Dictatorships, monarchies and oligarchies can be fascist. Communism, socialism and capitalism are economic systems and can be anywhere on the continuum from democratic to authoritarian. Greed is not good and power corrupts. Spread the wealth through equal opportunity and decentralize the power structures and give all stakeholders a seat at the round table. Our founders were just as flawed.
Actually, as.long as people are greedy they will have greedy leaders and any system will be corrupted.
Oh, wow, another person who can see thar economic systems aren't political systems!
I try to explain the difference like this: economic systems are on a "y" axis, from the freest to the most controlled, and political systems are on the "x" axis, from the freest to the most controlled.
You can make various combinations of these two systems with this. I believe that ours is high up on the continuum of "controlled economy" and has moved rapidly in the direction of "more controlled" political system in the last 50 years.
Capitalism cannot abide democracy. When the individual is the star of the model, the expectation that a government can act in the best interest of the society is fantasy. Germany serves as a good example. Germany, following their rebuild after WWII, built a parliamentarian government that was not attached to dogmatic homage to any ideology. They were capitalist in business and banking and legal affairs, but sought to maintain clean elections and autonomous governance. They had bureaucrats sit down with business leaders and trade union representatives, and they hashed out ground rules. They went on to become the most successful economy in Europe, and had the manufacturing and political infrastructure to lead the continent into a quasi-federated network. For years, they had a military budget that was intentionally dwarfed because of concerns of a return to aggression. That led to a relationship with the U.S. that was a dependent/enabler situation. Germany was a sort of silent partner in NATO, and completely in sync with anxious concerns about Soviet expansion. The U.S. bought German cooperation by assuming the latter’s military role and eating the costs. But fast forward to the present, and Germany’s chickens are coming home to roost. And this is the immutable nature of the capitalist model. Germany is all in on NATO... which is a de facto military representative of the EU. The demolition of the 20 billion-dollar Nordstream pipeline is the cost of allowing the U.S. to make policy on its behalf. The next elections in Germany should be interesting.
Not a problem for me comrade; I cannot abide a demoncrazy. That word is not to be found in a single document of the founding of this country.
So hence the divide, I favor a Republic where Rights are supposed to be guaranteed to the individual. That democRats have eroded the Republic to almost nothing remaining and now they blame what they have activelt destroyed as the problem is classical Bolshevik demonization.
NATO-UN-NWO-EU is all the same ball of tyranny imo. so we might agree on that, but not on your "solutions".
So, Comrade, Who do you appoint as the "Chief of Non-Greed"??? The conundrum is not solved that easily. BTW, "stakeholders" is NWO Facism which I would assume you oppose???
Shareholders are people who put their money in investments to better their lives while accepting the inherent risks of doing so. That is Individual Liberty.
I am using a definition of stakeholder as anyone affected by a decision. One does not see a homeless person, a small farmer, or a factory peon at Davos, for example. When enough people (a critical mass) face their shadow sides like greed and heal then we will have true public servants.
Dictatorships, monarchies and oligarchies can be fascist. Communism, socialism and capitalism are economic systems and can be anywhere on the continuum from democratic to authoritarian. Greed is not good and power corrupts. Spread the wealth through equal opportunity and decentralize the power structures and give all stakeholders a seat at the round table. Our founders were just as flawed.
Actually, as.long as people are greedy they will have greedy leaders and any system will be corrupted.
Oh, wow, another person who can see thar economic systems aren't political systems!
I try to explain the difference like this: economic systems are on a "y" axis, from the freest to the most controlled, and political systems are on the "x" axis, from the freest to the most controlled.
You can make various combinations of these two systems with this. I believe that ours is high up on the continuum of "controlled economy" and has moved rapidly in the direction of "more controlled" political system in the last 50 years.
Capitalism cannot abide democracy. When the individual is the star of the model, the expectation that a government can act in the best interest of the society is fantasy. Germany serves as a good example. Germany, following their rebuild after WWII, built a parliamentarian government that was not attached to dogmatic homage to any ideology. They were capitalist in business and banking and legal affairs, but sought to maintain clean elections and autonomous governance. They had bureaucrats sit down with business leaders and trade union representatives, and they hashed out ground rules. They went on to become the most successful economy in Europe, and had the manufacturing and political infrastructure to lead the continent into a quasi-federated network. For years, they had a military budget that was intentionally dwarfed because of concerns of a return to aggression. That led to a relationship with the U.S. that was a dependent/enabler situation. Germany was a sort of silent partner in NATO, and completely in sync with anxious concerns about Soviet expansion. The U.S. bought German cooperation by assuming the latter’s military role and eating the costs. But fast forward to the present, and Germany’s chickens are coming home to roost. And this is the immutable nature of the capitalist model. Germany is all in on NATO... which is a de facto military representative of the EU. The demolition of the 20 billion-dollar Nordstream pipeline is the cost of allowing the U.S. to make policy on its behalf. The next elections in Germany should be interesting.
Not a problem for me comrade; I cannot abide a demoncrazy. That word is not to be found in a single document of the founding of this country.
So hence the divide, I favor a Republic where Rights are supposed to be guaranteed to the individual. That democRats have eroded the Republic to almost nothing remaining and now they blame what they have activelt destroyed as the problem is classical Bolshevik demonization.
NATO-UN-NWO-EU is all the same ball of tyranny imo. so we might agree on that, but not on your "solutions".
Yes, but you already admitted that you don't want to get along with everyone, so criticisms from you are expected.
So, Comrade, Who do you appoint as the "Chief of Non-Greed"??? The conundrum is not solved that easily. BTW, "stakeholders" is NWO Facism which I would assume you oppose???
Shareholders are people who put their money in investments to better their lives while accepting the inherent risks of doing so. That is Individual Liberty.
Dear comrade,
I am using a definition of stakeholder as anyone affected by a decision. One does not see a homeless person, a small farmer, or a factory peon at Davos, for example. When enough people (a critical mass) face their shadow sides like greed and heal then we will have true public servants.
I know what "stakeholder" means, and so do you; It's "the Masses", typical Bolshevik lingo.
Are you also voting for more JoBama democRat Hope & Change? The NWO Masters sure hope so.
There is only one party: the neocon/neolib servant of the oligarchy which is capitalist and increasingly fascist. (And right-wing.)
You avoided answering, "WHO is the Chief of Non-Greed?" What "system" do you advocate for? The Borg or the Individual?