Free Speech ?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
So do you think singing "Up to your knees" in the street is Free Speech? That's the only point i'm making, I'm not interested in the currrent law, more to do with the article and it's writer.

I do. I don't like what he's singing but if we're going to have a right such as free speech then it's got to be for everyone
 
Free speech and capitalism have a lot in common.

Both brilliant ideas in principle but when left to humans its a ****ing catastrophe.
 
Free speech and capitalism have a lot in common.

Both brilliant ideas in principle but when left to humans its a ****ing catastrophe.

Same can be said for socialism. Free speech in practice is never going to be tranquil. People are too passionate in their beliefs to disagree politely, no matter how wrong or right they are.
 
Same can be said for socialism. Free speech in practice is never going to be tranquil. People are too passionate in their beliefs to disagree politely, no matter how wrong or right they are.

I agree but the socialism that was implemented by Russia, Cuba and other countries has been state-socialism. There's never been any real attempt to implement it properly.

That's not to say I believe socialism would work anyway. Like you say, it fails the same test as ultimately its humans that control it.
 
I agree but the socialism that was implemented by Russia, Cuba and other countries has been state-socialism. There's never been any real attempt to implement it properly.

That's not to say I believe socialism would work anyway. Like you say, it fails the same test as ultimately its humans that control it.

Marx thought that socialism could work if state communism was implemented, then the state would eventually wither away into a stateless society of autonomous communes. Anarchists sort of skip the state communism stage altogether and go straight for the autonomous communes. Either way, both are practically impossible to achieve successfully. The world is too industrialised and globalised for this to happen anyway. Marxism might have worked if Marx was alive in medieval times.
 
So socialism is now communism?
**** off Brett. Ponders is far more brainier than you, ye eejit.
 
Marx thought that socialism could work if state communism was implemented, then the state would eventually wither away into a stateless society of autonomous communes. Anarchists sort of skip the state communism stage altogether and go straight for the autonomous communes. Either way, both are practically impossible to achieve successfully. The world is too industrialised and globalised for this to happen anyway. Marxism might have worked if Marx was alive in medieval times.
Pish
 
So socialism is now communism?
**** off Brett. Ponders is far more brainier than you, ye eejit.

No, socialism is the stage before state communism, at least for Marx. I don't mind socialism that much. Our NHS is socialist, Scandinavia is pretty socialist. Socialism does a lot of good but I can't fully agree with it because I believe in social hierarchy. Most socialist political parties in the 21st century don't follow Marx's teachings at all. State communism has proven to be a failure and so Marx was wrong. Social democracy works better.
 
We're all ****ed anyway.

A giant space rock is coming to **** our **** up on September the 23rd. Read a blog now and again, jeez.
 
No, socialism is the stage before state communism, at least for Marx. I don't mind socialism that much. Our NHS is socialist, Scandinavia is pretty socialist. Socialism does a lot of good but I can't fully agree with it because I believe in social hierarchy. Most socialist political parties in the 21st century don't follow Marx's teachings at all. State communism has proven to be a failure and so Marx was wrong. Social democracy works better.
State capitalism has been a resounding success?

Socialism and Communism arre totally different things. China and the USSR weren't socialist countries. They were communist.

Some of the most successful countries in the world are considered socialist. Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Canada

All of those. are right at the top of the best places in the world to live. Socialism doesn't work though.
 
State capitalism has been a resounding success?

Socialism and Communism arre totally different things. China and the USSR weren't socialist countries. They were communist.

Some of the most successful countries in the world are considered socialist. Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Canada

All of those. are right at the top of the best places in the world to live. Socialism doesn't work though.

All monarchies. :emoticon-0136-giggl

State capitalism isn't a resounding success; it is the cause of many injustices like poverty and greed. Socialism, by definition, is the social ownership of the means of production. Marxism is a type of internationalist socialism which advocates a transitional statist communism before having a stateless society. Non-Marxist socialism includes social democracy, which the aforementioned countries practice, but they also use free-market capitalism alongside social democracy, hence it being called the 'Nordic Model'. Like I said, I'm not an anti-socialist, but Marxism as a political theory has failed. The best most socialists in the 21st century can hope for is egalitarian social democracy as practiced in Scandinavia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stopmeandslapme
A lot of swedes don't hold it in the same regard as we do ours, or even Denmarks.

There have been calls for Carl XVI Gustaf to abdicate in favour of his daughter becoming Queen, but I don't think the Swedish monarchy is facing any threat of abolition.

The Spanish monarchy, on the other hand, is the one to watch. Republicanism is very popular there at the moment and I suspect Spain to be the next monarchy to fall and become a republic. The Danish and Norwegian monarchies are very popular though.
 
There have been calls for Carl XVI Gustaf to abdicate in favour of his daughter becoming Queen, but I don't think the Swedish monarchy is facing any threat of abolition.

The Spanish monarchy, on the other hand, is the one to watch. Republicanism is very popular there at the moment and I suspect Spain to be the next monarchy to fall and become a republic. The Danish and Norwegian monarchies are very popular though.

As time passes humans will become more and more aware of any given monarchies uselessness. I have no doubts about this, even in the strongly supporting countries and especially when it comes to the Nordic countries.

Anyway, I'm not getting into a debate on monarchies. That's a ****ing drag man.
 
Religious wackjobs are free to grumble about how homosexuality is a sin and how insulting their prophet/s is disrespectful, but the moment they attempt or even contemplate to take violent action because of this is the moment they should be put down like the crazed dogs they are. People are free to have their infantile religious nonsense to themselves but that's the extent of my tolerance for it. No public faith schools, no public subsidies for churches, mosques, synagogues and the like and no official religion and/or special treatment for any religious group.
Excepting the C of E of course.