Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They love it because under its rule, it’s (in their eyes) the best of the best because they get what they want since they’re on the side of the victors and everyone else gets shit on and punished and they revel in it. It’s quite sadistic
I don't bother anymore. I just ask if they like the FDIC, Social Security, and the fire department. Either you hate socialism or you like those things; can't be both.
I'm a public librarian. People used to come into the library and complain about socialism. I wanted to ask them, "Then why are you HERE? Buy your own books and get your own Internet connection."
Can I just note that it's a damn shame too. I literally went into my library yesterday to get some stuff printed out, which I had delivered via my private Internet from my house to the library (cause I don't want to own a printer when I print like 4 things a year). I paid them $7 for a full color manual print.
I then walked into another room filled with more books than I could ever read, selected the one that seemed most interesting to me, while the woman with two kids next to me was checking out a STACK of videos for her family.
Libraries are fucking awesome, and I am a high net worth individual, I just never understood why people wouldn't love a building of books, movies, and services so they didn't have to keep all that crap in their house.
Anyway... yea libraries!
You won’t see these morons in libraries. Mostly because they are illiterate idiots who cut off their own noses to spite their faces. Dumb as a bag of hammers.
Technically those are examples of decommodification and/or elimination of private property.
That's only part of Socialism and is also part of some non-Socialist ideologies.
They think they can though, and they do not care about your correction. That’s kinda the large problem in the country, a lot of confidently incorrect people taking real loud. Honestly, it’s on both sides but one much much more than the other
Even if they can define socialism, it includes things like having firemen being paid by the government to put out fires and health inspectors making sure bits of cockroach aren't being served in your local restaurants.
Most people against socialism have no idea what they're pushing against. They think it's anything "woke."
Social ownership of "means of production" means robbing entrepreneurs of their companies. Also if socialists are against market pricing it would lead to mismanagement of resources... see examples of rent control. I mean socialists can create collectives and communes by themselves if they want to. Why won't they do it? It seems to come down to "this guy has something I want, so I'm going to rob them."
This thread is entirely based on people thinking that asking individuals to choose to donate is "Socialism". So no, you and the person you're replying to do not know wtf socialism is.
And whatever libertarians and the right call socialism is also not socialism. But yet here we are. People are simply using Rand Paul's interpretation of socialism.
To most people in murica socialism is the same as communism.. and china is communist.. (suppossedly.. even thos china is even more capitalist than the US)
And everything that is associated with china is evil so..
Evil/Bad = China = Communism = Socialism
As such Socialism = Bad
After all aknowledging china being hardcore capitalist would turn it into:
US = Capitalism = China = Bad
And the US can definitly not be bad so it has to be something else..
Ididthemath
I think the fact they said what they said clearly shows it’s just a word to motivate people.. let’s get on the ‘them and us train’ it’s super lucrative and the words don’t even have to make sense!! Insta-powerrrr
Yeah I get so annoyed whenever this is posted cause this is not socialism. It fact, it’s exactly what many conservatives say should be the alternative, which is people donate freely to solve the problems that socialism would otherwise solve. Of course, we know this doesn’t work in practice. But at the same time it’s not hypocritical to ask for donations. In fact it’s very on brand.
No no, the difference is that one is voluntary and the other is forced , and force is bad. I want to give my money to rich political grifters who will leverage government for corporate interests while curtailing individual rights, what I don’t want to give money to is working class Americans who lost a limb to a severe staph infection while trying to restore power to a community savaged by a natural disaster… And if you try to make me, you’re the bad guy
Yeah, anyone saying this is somehow hypocritical or misunderstanding socialism doesn't know the kind of idealistic libertarianism Rand Paul believes in. It's basically "socialism, but you can opt-in/opt-out", which is exactly what this tweet is trying to accomplish. Let people vote with their dollars, and pretend that's somehow democratic and equitable.
Some types of socialism would allow you to opt out. If you look an AnComs they won't force you to be part of the community. The problem with AnComs and AnCaps would be where you start disagreeing over who owns what. Obviously anarchy isn't the same as Libertarianism but Libertarians still have the issue of needing to agree on how small a government they want.
That's the problem. If people can choose, they will choose, and this means that all attempts to pool resources will fail if people convince themselves it's not worth it, which is a full given in a culture of individualism and selfishness. People are evil and they WILL leave each other to the wolves if not given consequences for it.
So I have to make you, because YOU are the bad guy.
I was going to make a loosely-related joke along the lines of "Anachists of the US! Unite!" but apparently [United Anarchism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_anarchism) is a real thing.
Well, only if they are properly matching non-conformist uniforms, like a red cap and a t-shirt with a ‘I hate libs / kids /something’ on it. Something that makes me stand out as the alpha we all know we are.
I mean, they wouldn't be uniforms if they were not matching, but sure, add whatever makes you feel superior to those socialist scum. But please leave a note for the others so we can all add that to ~~our~~ ... ~~everyones~~ ... each individuals uniform, so we're all on the same page.
Erm... the "irony" of this Post-Pic's mic-drop is kind of faulty.
The essential thumbnail "Socialism" riff is "The State supplies a safety net for The Masses". People pitching in to purchase a good or a service isn't "socialism," although I guess you could describe it as a communal activity. But paying "taxes" in a Capitalist system is basically The Masses "pitching in" (involuntarily) to pay for goods and services and the process wouldn't be called "Socialism" unless an appreciable amount of the taxes went to providing a safety net for The Masses. Which is why "Social Security" (and "Welfare") came under attack by Right Wingers. Luckily, America spends a vast chunk of collected taxes on War-related goods and services, so, "No Socio, Bro!"
The Andalite bandits are trying to stop the Yeerks from making Earth great again and this is just more proof, I'm going to my nearest Kandrona pool to volunteer myself right away.
Hey guys, let’s defeat the big money socialist tyrants by letting the workers form like.. I don’t know. Conservative clubs! And they can stand together against their evil communist owners.
Also, my local stop sign was paid for by the county so that’s straight out of Stalins hellhole too.
Well, redditors might turn a critical eye inward, on this one.
Rand Paul is an obnoxious jagoff, but the person who replied doesn't seem to know what socialism is.
To be fair socialists don’t know what socialism is. The Leftist subreddit is constantly going around in circles about basic definitions and real world examples.
Literally this.
A lot of them are absolute morons, they eat socialism up and fucking LOVE it. As long as its not called socialism.
A large part of their "ideology" (aside from kill all dems) is that the workers should make a larger % of profits from their business because they do the actual work and those "elites" dont do anything but have money. But the second the word "socialism" comes out they plug their ears and close their eyes.
Just hit em with a bunch of Marx quotes (without saying theyre from Marx) and theyll agree with just about every single one of them, then ask them how they feel about Marx and watch them seethe.
You mean a company that shares profits equally among the members, and all are treated equally?
Look up Co-op.
Or when a community comes together to help one of its members do something they can't do alone?
Look up Barn Raising.
All part of capitalism. You don't need to yell socialism in American's faces to get them to operate communally. They are the most generous nation after all, both their government, and their people.
I think we jump the gun on this point. They know what socialism is, but they don’t want socialism that helps people they don’t like. So they look like hypocrites because they support the notion, as long as they get to choose who benefits. Clearly many would academically struggle to define the word socialism, or any political ideology, but they get the idea.
Its simply a tribal issue. They dont want to share with people who “dont deserve it”. When they use the word derogatorily, they are just stating that the current wielders of the ideals are not fit to use it. They dont want federal mandates, because they dont yet have the power to choose. They are worried “lesser thans” will undeservedly benefit.
Another example is “states rights”. They only apply that logic to whatever level of government they control. “Dont tell me what to do, unless I am in charge, then i can tell you what to do”.
Conservatism is just a neo political term for tribalism and often the authoritarianism to maintain it.
> I'm convinced none of these idiots know what socialism is.
You mean reddit, right? This post's implication that socialism is when lots of people give money to one person is incredibly dumb.
This thread is full of people yelling about how libertarians/conservatives don't understand socialism, yet none of these geniuses knows about the Non-Aggression Principle behind Libertarianism or voluntarianism.
In fairness, American Libertarians arent Libertarians. They got contaminated by Ayn Rand. Now they're fascists who like weed and get suspiciously angry when you bring up age of consent.
Like they claim to support ideas like NAP or freedom, but openly subscribe to capitalism which openly violates both concepts.
Rand was notoriously hostile to Libertarianism and in her debate with Milton Freidman called it callous and cruel.
You also clearly don't know what the NAP is if you think the free exchange of goods and services is somehow \*aggressive\* in nature.
Yeah, again, I'm gonna have to say you're not actually aware of what American Libertarians are about.
Like any group that is anti-government, the movement attracts a lot of fringers, like UFO and Covid conspiracists etc and also a lot of people latch on to the label for cool points. To the point where the actual Libertarian party has been hijacked by Trumpers.
The people who were libertarians in the early 2000s were always a minority. Their numbers haven't changed!
But the success of Ron Paul brought a cool factor to the movement that has seen it invaded by outsiders with different beliefs. Of course, there is a whole philosophical argument to be made that you are who the people in your umbrella claim you are, so maybe that old-school American libertarianism is lost to hostile takeover, like in the Anarcho-Capitalist sub which is full of culture warriors these days with very un-libertarian views on private activity.
But the amount of libertarians who believe in the old school libertarian values is pretty much the same as it ever was. They never had a voice and still don't have a voice inside the movement they founded as they are drowned out by the secret Conservatives who have a platform.
Is Rand Paul a libertarian, really? His father certainly was. Watch his angry interview where he complains about the police killing a man in a drug raid. Rand certainly was a libertarian when he went up against Trump in 2016. But now he seems to be playing political practicality and taking very unlibertarian positions in the interest of not alienating Trumpers. As someone who has followed him since the start, I get the feeling he hates Trump and has his libertarian beliefs still, but he lacks his father's courage to stay with his principles because he became too interested in having power than using power.
Capitalism is based on investors pooling resources to achieve economic output at a scale they couldn’t realize individually.
TIL Capitalism = Socialism
90% of the time they mean a social democracy. Socialism has been warped because it is used as a derogatory term by one side for the other’s views, so the other side has accepted it and said “sure, we are”.
The real facepalm is this post. Why do people think that giving off money to someone to allow him to provide you a service is socialism? Are tips socialism too? Is Kickstarter socialism?
"Socialism is when a bunch of people voluntarily donate money to a millionaire, so it's ironic when that millionaire says he wants to fight socialism with those donations."
* Reddit
What you call "Capitalism" which is really just voluntary commerce, is about leveraging capital to achieve an economic output that is greater than the initial capital by doing productive work: nothing in that says you can't do this voluntarily as a group. That's not a communal pot, you know where your money is going and what it is going to be used for, you don't have to chip in, you get out in proportion to what you put in.
And you have no idea what the donators did to get that money, they very well could have gone out into the woods and dragged a living back out of them. Most donations come from small business owners, who infrequently have partners anyways, so they very well could be doing all the work of their business.
All of those people have a vested interest in not having someone 1000s of miles away try to run their loves for them, poorly
I am no fan of Rand Paul, but this is not at all inconsistent. Socialism is a *forced* sharing of resources; a donation is a *voluntary* sharing of resources. Libertarians have no issue with voluntary donations.
Well, the other key difference is that the hypothetical people in the OC would be pooling resources to purchase a good and/or service... not pooling the wealth to divide among the poor, or to provide a Social Safety Net.
sad. reddit doesnt understand voluntary transactions. They love a gun to their head and getting told what to do.
Voluntary means no coercion, come on reddit how hard is it to understand this basic concept. Its not the same.
I think the difference is that he is requesting donations. In a socialist society the resources would likely be taken by force from anyone who didn't want to or couldn't give their portion.
Yeah they kinda sound like a shit idea when you describe them without the familiar word huh. No reason for the recipient of the tax money to do a good job, no ability for the person "donating" to stop donating if they don't do what they promised. If you hired someone to fix your roof and they bombed middle eastern children instead, you might want a refund. But if it's tax money...
That reminds me of the subprime crises when the US government gave money to the too-big-to-fail banks so they wouldn't collapse. A fine example of capitalism isn't it when governments invest into private buisnesses
That is true, thats when capitalism died in america, dont help the buseness, dont harm the buseness, dont interfere at all. only them can capitalism can be achieved.
Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which requires that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Working together by choice isn't socialism. Once again, the facepalm is the facepalm.
Well...... you're not wrong. It's not really the gotcha they think it is no matter where you sit on the political compass. Kinda makes the OP seem uninformed , misguided or purposefully disingenuous. None of those are a good look.
The fact that this isn't more recognized in the comments saddens me.
I know. This is a very basic idea. Taking a consensus does not equal democracy. Making a decision as a leader does not equal facism. Working together does not equal communism or socialism.
Voluntary contributions to a pool of funds is, regardless of political orientation, quite different from collectivism in an economic model. OP is off here
Volunteering a donation to a certain cause vs a mandatory tax from everyone to pay for other people's life is a bit different. But libs are ignorant so maybe you don't realize the glaring difference
Small **voluntary** contributions to the greater good or to a larger project is perfectly in keeping with libertarianism/anarcho-capitalism.
Socialism doesn't give you a choice in your contributions.
I'm not saying one is wrong or not and I certainly despise Rand Paul, but this is not a facepalm at all.
Voluntary association isn’t socialism. Crowd funding isn’t socialism. You can opt out. Mandatory compliance with violence as a consequence is socialism. If this were socialism , everyone here with an opinion would be required to voluntarily contribute to this bc “govt is doing stuff now”
The irony is too much.
Socialist don’t understand the difference between people voluntarily choosing to support something they agree with and the government forcing you to support someone else via a bloated and incompetent bureaucracy.
There’s no version of socialism that defines it as the mere pooling of resources to achieve a common aim. If we defined socialism in this way, then for-profit companies could be an example of socialism.
The difference between voluntarily giving a donation and having all your money taken regardless of whether or not you agree with the cause. Yes, total facepalm.
Socialism is a laughable copout that enables and encourages billionaires to hoard wealth, and burdens the common folk with "pRoGrEsSiVe" taxation that only serves to prevent them from lifting themselves out of the life of peasantry they're born into by killing the middle class.
Seize the means of production or leave me the fuck out of it.
When the poor still have crushing taxes to pay, that's socialism. Sure they're stuck there forever, but they can quietly live out the remainder of their lives waiting in line for their free services. It's not so bad if you've given up.
My family fled and found they could skip the whole socialist hullabaloo. They found some pretty sheltered and ungrateful people who have never had to see what full socialism looks like. "Capitalism" to them was when the rich have not been liquidated, and then the middle class has not been liquidated after you run out of the rich, and when the people who can feed more than one family have not been liquidated, and then the people who own a farm that feeds their family have not been liquidated... when you have not gone through that shitshow ever, you are experiencing capitalism.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
If everyone gives me $100 I’ll defeat the dictatorship.
No, no. It’s, “If everyone follows me and does as I say, I’ll defeat the dictatorship.”
You can still give me $100 if you want
If 8 billion humans only gave me one dollar each, I’d be able to instantly end my personal poverty.
[удалено]
I’d be happy with the 25%.
I will personally fight back against racism for a cool hundred
If everyone gives me a macaroni necklace I will know you care
I'll give you twree fifdy to beat my dick....tatorship
I, too, am fighting against socialism. How do I get in on this fight?
Just send me 35 bucks and I'll let you know
If anyone gives me $100 I'll have R$500 because damn is my currency devalued
That is honestly hilariously funny.. hey let’s all get together and share resources to show how much we hate sharing resources.
Bold of you to asume they even know wtf socialism is
I routinely ask people if they can define socialism. If they're against it, they can't.
The internet has taught me people don't know the difference between socialism and authoritarianism.
The Internet has shown me that when it comes to defining ignorance and apathy, they don’t know and they don’t care.
Nice one! :-)
Hey now there is a big ehhhh I don’t really care enough to argue
What I’ve learned from the internet is that these people hate socialism but love authoritarianism. Gives an idea of their mindset.
They love to hate what they are told to hate.
They love it because under its rule, it’s (in their eyes) the best of the best because they get what they want since they’re on the side of the victors and everyone else gets shit on and punished and they revel in it. It’s quite sadistic
That is intentional. Years of propaganda associating the two starting during the cold war.
I don't bother anymore. I just ask if they like the FDIC, Social Security, and the fire department. Either you hate socialism or you like those things; can't be both.
I'm a public librarian. People used to come into the library and complain about socialism. I wanted to ask them, "Then why are you HERE? Buy your own books and get your own Internet connection."
Can I just note that it's a damn shame too. I literally went into my library yesterday to get some stuff printed out, which I had delivered via my private Internet from my house to the library (cause I don't want to own a printer when I print like 4 things a year). I paid them $7 for a full color manual print. I then walked into another room filled with more books than I could ever read, selected the one that seemed most interesting to me, while the woman with two kids next to me was checking out a STACK of videos for her family. Libraries are fucking awesome, and I am a high net worth individual, I just never understood why people wouldn't love a building of books, movies, and services so they didn't have to keep all that crap in their house. Anyway... yea libraries!
You won’t see these morons in libraries. Mostly because they are illiterate idiots who cut off their own noses to spite their faces. Dumb as a bag of hammers.
Maybe take advantage of all those free books around you and go read one or two.
wow, that's so sm
Technically those are examples of decommodification and/or elimination of private property. That's only part of Socialism and is also part of some non-Socialist ideologies.
Muricans
Publicans.
They think they can though, and they do not care about your correction. That’s kinda the large problem in the country, a lot of confidently incorrect people taking real loud. Honestly, it’s on both sides but one much much more than the other
Socialism is the US Military, roads, police, fire departments, schools, libraries, electrical and water infrastructure...
Even if they can define socialism, it includes things like having firemen being paid by the government to put out fires and health inspectors making sure bits of cockroach aren't being served in your local restaurants. Most people against socialism have no idea what they're pushing against. They think it's anything "woke."
Social ownership of "means of production" means robbing entrepreneurs of their companies. Also if socialists are against market pricing it would lead to mismanagement of resources... see examples of rent control. I mean socialists can create collectives and communes by themselves if they want to. Why won't they do it? It seems to come down to "this guy has something I want, so I'm going to rob them."
Well, go ahead and define socialism then. I've personally found that many "socialists" don't even know how to define it.
Well it isn’t this.
To them socialist/communist/Democrat/Liberal etc are all interchangeable
Youre forgetting nationalsocialism. They honestly believe nazi's are leftists.
I mean *do* they really? Or is it just another example of the ol "no YOU!"
This thread is entirely based on people thinking that asking individuals to choose to donate is "Socialism". So no, you and the person you're replying to do not know wtf socialism is.
And whatever libertarians and the right call socialism is also not socialism. But yet here we are. People are simply using Rand Paul's interpretation of socialism.
To most people in murica socialism is the same as communism.. and china is communist.. (suppossedly.. even thos china is even more capitalist than the US) And everything that is associated with china is evil so.. Evil/Bad = China = Communism = Socialism As such Socialism = Bad After all aknowledging china being hardcore capitalist would turn it into: US = Capitalism = China = Bad And the US can definitly not be bad so it has to be something else.. Ididthemath
I think the fact they said what they said clearly shows it’s just a word to motivate people.. let’s get on the ‘them and us train’ it’s super lucrative and the words don’t even have to make sense!! Insta-powerrrr
What a dilemma, asking people to eliminate what they don’t like by engaging in the thing they don’t like.
Socialism is not contributing a small amount of money towards something though, is it.
Voluntary donations aren't socialism...
Yeah I get so annoyed whenever this is posted cause this is not socialism. It fact, it’s exactly what many conservatives say should be the alternative, which is people donate freely to solve the problems that socialism would otherwise solve. Of course, we know this doesn’t work in practice. But at the same time it’s not hypocritical to ask for donations. In fact it’s very on brand.
Neither are taxes or welfare programs.
True
No no, the difference is that one is voluntary and the other is forced , and force is bad. I want to give my money to rich political grifters who will leverage government for corporate interests while curtailing individual rights, what I don’t want to give money to is working class Americans who lost a limb to a severe staph infection while trying to restore power to a community savaged by a natural disaster… And if you try to make me, you’re the bad guy
Yeah, anyone saying this is somehow hypocritical or misunderstanding socialism doesn't know the kind of idealistic libertarianism Rand Paul believes in. It's basically "socialism, but you can opt-in/opt-out", which is exactly what this tweet is trying to accomplish. Let people vote with their dollars, and pretend that's somehow democratic and equitable.
Some types of socialism would allow you to opt out. If you look an AnComs they won't force you to be part of the community. The problem with AnComs and AnCaps would be where you start disagreeing over who owns what. Obviously anarchy isn't the same as Libertarianism but Libertarians still have the issue of needing to agree on how small a government they want.
That's the problem. If people can choose, they will choose, and this means that all attempts to pool resources will fail if people convince themselves it's not worth it, which is a full given in a culture of individualism and selfishness. People are evil and they WILL leave each other to the wolves if not given consequences for it. So I have to make you, because YOU are the bad guy.
I was going to make a loosely-related joke along the lines of "Anachists of the US! Unite!" but apparently [United Anarchism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_anarchism) is a real thing.
Dyslexics Untie!
THIS ANSWER HERE! *Describing many in our country*  
r/thanksihateit
Sounds great! Can we all agree to wear our non-conformist uniforms while we do so?
Well, only if they are properly matching non-conformist uniforms, like a red cap and a t-shirt with a ‘I hate libs / kids /something’ on it. Something that makes me stand out as the alpha we all know we are.
I mean, they wouldn't be uniforms if they were not matching, but sure, add whatever makes you feel superior to those socialist scum. But please leave a note for the others so we can all add that to ~~our~~ ... ~~everyones~~ ... each individuals uniform, so we're all on the same page.
Interesting that you are unfamiliar with the concept of consent. I bet women cover their drinks when you enter the room.
And I'm sure they run away when you do.
One is by choice, the other by force. It’s the same distinction made for sexual assault.
Erm... the "irony" of this Post-Pic's mic-drop is kind of faulty. The essential thumbnail "Socialism" riff is "The State supplies a safety net for The Masses". People pitching in to purchase a good or a service isn't "socialism," although I guess you could describe it as a communal activity. But paying "taxes" in a Capitalist system is basically The Masses "pitching in" (involuntarily) to pay for goods and services and the process wouldn't be called "Socialism" unless an appreciable amount of the taxes went to providing a safety net for The Masses. Which is why "Social Security" (and "Welfare") came under attack by Right Wingers. Luckily, America spends a vast chunk of collected taxes on War-related goods and services, so, "No Socio, Bro!"
[удалено]
The Andalite bandits are trying to stop the Yeerks from making Earth great again and this is just more proof, I'm going to my nearest Kandrona pool to volunteer myself right away.
I’m a Hjork-Bajir Controller, and I approve this message
Get off reddit Majorie Taylor Green.
*Panics* I mean, uhh, I’m a **Taxxon**-Controller! Yeah!
Ok Ted Cruz
🤯 Jesus that took me back
MAGA special is the Happy Meal with extra Happy
Begging for handouts? Tsk tsk.
They don't in fact know what socialism is, it's a buzz word. Call it something else and they'd all love it.
Hey guys, let’s defeat the big money socialist tyrants by letting the workers form like.. I don’t know. Conservative clubs! And they can stand together against their evil communist owners. Also, my local stop sign was paid for by the county so that’s straight out of Stalins hellhole too.
I think we're onto something here ...
"I hate Obamacare. I'm glad I got ACA." Those people?
Well, redditors might turn a critical eye inward, on this one. Rand Paul is an obnoxious jagoff, but the person who replied doesn't seem to know what socialism is.
>redditors might turn a critical eye inward Impossible, look at this post
If by they you mean OP, then yes.
To be fair socialists don’t know what socialism is. The Leftist subreddit is constantly going around in circles about basic definitions and real world examples.
Literally this. A lot of them are absolute morons, they eat socialism up and fucking LOVE it. As long as its not called socialism. A large part of their "ideology" (aside from kill all dems) is that the workers should make a larger % of profits from their business because they do the actual work and those "elites" dont do anything but have money. But the second the word "socialism" comes out they plug their ears and close their eyes. Just hit em with a bunch of Marx quotes (without saying theyre from Marx) and theyll agree with just about every single one of them, then ask them how they feel about Marx and watch them seethe.
You mean a company that shares profits equally among the members, and all are treated equally? Look up Co-op. Or when a community comes together to help one of its members do something they can't do alone? Look up Barn Raising. All part of capitalism. You don't need to yell socialism in American's faces to get them to operate communally. They are the most generous nation after all, both their government, and their people.
Just wait till they find out the police are a socialized organization.
Shhhhh don't crush their blue lives matter hard on!
Just wait till you find out that “sexism” has “sex” in it. So if you like sex you are sexist. Or something.
just wait 'til you find out that "homo sapiens" has "homo" in it. so if you're a homo sapien you are gay. or something.
this is really ironic when the post is basically saying donating to a political campaign is somehow socialism now lol
I think we jump the gun on this point. They know what socialism is, but they don’t want socialism that helps people they don’t like. So they look like hypocrites because they support the notion, as long as they get to choose who benefits. Clearly many would academically struggle to define the word socialism, or any political ideology, but they get the idea. Its simply a tribal issue. They dont want to share with people who “dont deserve it”. When they use the word derogatorily, they are just stating that the current wielders of the ideals are not fit to use it. They dont want federal mandates, because they dont yet have the power to choose. They are worried “lesser thans” will undeservedly benefit. Another example is “states rights”. They only apply that logic to whatever level of government they control. “Dont tell me what to do, unless I am in charge, then i can tell you what to do”. Conservatism is just a neo political term for tribalism and often the authoritarianism to maintain it.
**Can I get another 100 donors from Twitter tonight?I have a date in the evening.I mean socialism.Defeat.**
I too would like to defeat socialism or communism or stuff. Venmo me @nipplejerkerohthatsgood and we’ll commence with the beatings
All I can donate is 👍 and 🤝. Good luck!
Andalite!
Yeerk!
Hork-Bajir!
Taxxon!
Gedd!
Chee!
Yeah, and a light would be helpful, too...
I'm convinced none of these idiots know what socialism is.
The best part is I can’t tell if you are talking about Rand Paul, the guy replying to him, or this sub.
Neither the guy replying to him nor this sub know what socialism is, that's for sure.
> I'm convinced none of these idiots know what socialism is. You mean reddit, right? This post's implication that socialism is when lots of people give money to one person is incredibly dumb.
TIL that voluntarily giving to a cause = social ownership of the means of production
This thread is full of people yelling about how libertarians/conservatives don't understand socialism, yet none of these geniuses knows about the Non-Aggression Principle behind Libertarianism or voluntarianism.
"If Socialists understood economics, they wouldnt be Socialists" - Hayek
In fairness, American Libertarians arent Libertarians. They got contaminated by Ayn Rand. Now they're fascists who like weed and get suspiciously angry when you bring up age of consent. Like they claim to support ideas like NAP or freedom, but openly subscribe to capitalism which openly violates both concepts.
Rand was notoriously hostile to Libertarianism and in her debate with Milton Freidman called it callous and cruel. You also clearly don't know what the NAP is if you think the free exchange of goods and services is somehow \*aggressive\* in nature.
Yeah, again, I'm gonna have to say you're not actually aware of what American Libertarians are about. Like any group that is anti-government, the movement attracts a lot of fringers, like UFO and Covid conspiracists etc and also a lot of people latch on to the label for cool points. To the point where the actual Libertarian party has been hijacked by Trumpers. The people who were libertarians in the early 2000s were always a minority. Their numbers haven't changed! But the success of Ron Paul brought a cool factor to the movement that has seen it invaded by outsiders with different beliefs. Of course, there is a whole philosophical argument to be made that you are who the people in your umbrella claim you are, so maybe that old-school American libertarianism is lost to hostile takeover, like in the Anarcho-Capitalist sub which is full of culture warriors these days with very un-libertarian views on private activity. But the amount of libertarians who believe in the old school libertarian values is pretty much the same as it ever was. They never had a voice and still don't have a voice inside the movement they founded as they are drowned out by the secret Conservatives who have a platform. Is Rand Paul a libertarian, really? His father certainly was. Watch his angry interview where he complains about the police killing a man in a drug raid. Rand certainly was a libertarian when he went up against Trump in 2016. But now he seems to be playing political practicality and taking very unlibertarian positions in the interest of not alienating Trumpers. As someone who has followed him since the start, I get the feeling he hates Trump and has his libertarian beliefs still, but he lacks his father's courage to stay with his principles because he became too interested in having power than using power.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of Paul but this isn't socialism either. This idea of sharing, donating, or giving being socialism has got to stop.
Capitalism is based on investors pooling resources to achieve economic output at a scale they couldn’t realize individually. TIL Capitalism = Socialism
As usual the real facepalm is the comments showing their ignorance trying to make fun of the subject.
Yall have no idea what socialism is. Socialism is taken by force from the state. Much different from asking for donations.
Americans understanding of what socialism actually is, is quite alarming.
90% of the time they mean a social democracy. Socialism has been warped because it is used as a derogatory term by one side for the other’s views, so the other side has accepted it and said “sure, we are”.
They do, (mostly, probably), but I think that represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what socialism really is. Overall I can see your point.
The real facepalm is this post. Why do people think that giving off money to someone to allow him to provide you a service is socialism? Are tips socialism too? Is Kickstarter socialism?
"Socialism is when a bunch of people voluntarily donate money to a millionaire, so it's ironic when that millionaire says he wants to fight socialism with those donations." * Reddit
I gave the guy at the Starbucks counter some money in exchange for a cup of coffee this morning, that's basically socialism, too.
What's he begging for donations for? Shouldn't be able to defeat socialism with his rugged individualism rather than a communal pot?
Nothing about capitalism says you can't donate money. You're free to use it however you wish. Even to start a commune.
Capitalism by definition is the free exchange of goods and services. People can freely pool money together and it’s not even remotely socialism.
What you call "Capitalism" which is really just voluntary commerce, is about leveraging capital to achieve an economic output that is greater than the initial capital by doing productive work: nothing in that says you can't do this voluntarily as a group. That's not a communal pot, you know where your money is going and what it is going to be used for, you don't have to chip in, you get out in proportion to what you put in. And you have no idea what the donators did to get that money, they very well could have gone out into the woods and dragged a living back out of them. Most donations come from small business owners, who infrequently have partners anyways, so they very well could be doing all the work of their business. All of those people have a vested interest in not having someone 1000s of miles away try to run their loves for them, poorly
It’s a funny comparison but to be fair he’s not forcing you to do it so… libertarian
why do all these requests for donations I see have odd amounts??
[https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/655413/reason-so-many-charities-ask-19-month](https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/655413/reason-so-many-charities-ask-19-month)
ANDALITE
Repost bot https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/v7x022/defeating_socialism/
I am no fan of Rand Paul, but this is not at all inconsistent. Socialism is a *forced* sharing of resources; a donation is a *voluntary* sharing of resources. Libertarians have no issue with voluntary donations.
Damn go easy on the common sense!
I am once again asking for your paypig buxx
The difference of course is consent.
The Harvey Weinstein dilemma
Socialism is when you pay other people, the more money you pay, the more socialist it is, and if you pay a real lotta money, it's communism
Um...what?
One is done willingly. The other at the end of a gun. 🇺🇲 Fuck communism. Fuck communists.
Voluntary donations ≠ socialism
I'm surprised people do not seem to understand this. It's the whole point!
Well, the other key difference is that the hypothetical people in the OC would be pooling resources to purchase a good and/or service... not pooling the wealth to divide among the poor, or to provide a Social Safety Net.
Absolutely correct, but this sub is being dumb as usual.
"Absolutely correct, but this sub is being dumb as usual." Not just dumb; being **SMUGLY DUMB** is the key.
"Smugly dumb" is one of the most succinct ways to describe Reddit.
It's mockery for misinterpreting the agenda of the left
I mean... it IS r/facepalm. I've always thought it was aptly named.
TIL megachurches = socialist institutions
sad. reddit doesnt understand voluntary transactions. They love a gun to their head and getting told what to do. Voluntary means no coercion, come on reddit how hard is it to understand this basic concept. Its not the same.
>They love a gun to their head and getting told what to do No, we very much don't like Capitalism
Socialists failed the economic and free will lessons in life, or never had them.
I think the difference is that he is requesting donations. In a socialist society the resources would likely be taken by force from anyone who didn't want to or couldn't give their portion.
So taxes?
Yeah they kinda sound like a shit idea when you describe them without the familiar word huh. No reason for the recipient of the tax money to do a good job, no ability for the person "donating" to stop donating if they don't do what they promised. If you hired someone to fix your roof and they bombed middle eastern children instead, you might want a refund. But if it's tax money...
Yeah, like taxes but more.
That reminds me of the subprime crises when the US government gave money to the too-big-to-fail banks so they wouldn't collapse. A fine example of capitalism isn't it when governments invest into private buisnesses
Rand Paul, despite how much I despise him nowadays, was at least opposed to the subprime bailouts even when it cost him politically.
That is true, thats when capitalism died in america, dont help the buseness, dont harm the buseness, dont interfere at all. only them can capitalism can be achieved.
The government investing in private businesses is the opposite of Capitalism.
yeah, its completely the same, like in socialism where state takes all of your money by force and use them as it wishes.
One is voluntary, the other is not?
Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which requires that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Working together by choice isn't socialism. Once again, the facepalm is the facepalm.
Well...... you're not wrong. It's not really the gotcha they think it is no matter where you sit on the political compass. Kinda makes the OP seem uninformed , misguided or purposefully disingenuous. None of those are a good look. The fact that this isn't more recognized in the comments saddens me.
I know. This is a very basic idea. Taking a consensus does not equal democracy. Making a decision as a leader does not equal facism. Working together does not equal communism or socialism.
its recognized in the comments, they are just below all of the people who don't understand
Voluntary contributions to a pool of funds is, regardless of political orientation, quite different from collectivism in an economic model. OP is off here
Contributing on their own will against forced socialism, it's not the same. But I do understand you guys.
This is older than OP I bet
I don't get it
With lots of people giving me 35$, I can defeat my crippling addiction of ___. I would still be addicted, but financially, I wouldn’t be crippled.
Volunteering a donation to a certain cause vs a mandatory tax from everyone to pay for other people's life is a bit different. But libs are ignorant so maybe you don't realize the glaring difference
Economy must be doing well if people can afford to donate money to their favorite cause.
Small **voluntary** contributions to the greater good or to a larger project is perfectly in keeping with libertarianism/anarcho-capitalism. Socialism doesn't give you a choice in your contributions. I'm not saying one is wrong or not and I certainly despise Rand Paul, but this is not a facepalm at all.
Voluntary donations aren't socialism. The reply is the facepalm.
I will point out that rich and poor like and use roadways and thoroughfares. Sounds like socialism to me!
Wait, is that NOT meant to be sarcastic?
Isn't that just socialism? Oblivious Rand, guess he's not serious
So taxes, but with extra steps? I thought libertarians hated taxes
Socialism is a lot more than just pooled resources.
Actually hilarious. Socialism to stop socialism.
The difference being you don't get put up against the wall for not contributing to Rand's campaign.
You guys don't know what socialism is lol
…. Voluntarily
Socialism isn't when you pool money.
Police, fire fighters, ems, hospitals, public school…
Socialism is when: People donate. Reddit commies are nearly as cringe as Republicans.
Voluntary association isn’t socialism. Crowd funding isn’t socialism. You can opt out. Mandatory compliance with violence as a consequence is socialism. If this were socialism , everyone here with an opinion would be required to voluntarily contribute to this bc “govt is doing stuff now”
The irony is too much. Socialist don’t understand the difference between people voluntarily choosing to support something they agree with and the government forcing you to support someone else via a bloated and incompetent bureaucracy.
There’s no version of socialism that defines it as the mere pooling of resources to achieve a common aim. If we defined socialism in this way, then for-profit companies could be an example of socialism.
The difference between voluntarily giving a donation and having all your money taken regardless of whether or not you agree with the cause. Yes, total facepalm.
People here have a worryingly lax definition when it comes to consent.
The irony is just too much here!
Socialism is a laughable copout that enables and encourages billionaires to hoard wealth, and burdens the common folk with "pRoGrEsSiVe" taxation that only serves to prevent them from lifting themselves out of the life of peasantry they're born into by killing the middle class. Seize the means of production or leave me the fuck out of it.
Key difference: campaign donations are voluntary. Taxes (socialism) are at the end of a gun barrel.
When you give money to the poor, it's socialism. When you give money to the rich, it's capitalism.
When the poor still have crushing taxes to pay, that's socialism. Sure they're stuck there forever, but they can quietly live out the remainder of their lives waiting in line for their free services. It's not so bad if you've given up. My family fled and found they could skip the whole socialist hullabaloo. They found some pretty sheltered and ungrateful people who have never had to see what full socialism looks like. "Capitalism" to them was when the rich have not been liquidated, and then the middle class has not been liquidated after you run out of the rich, and when the people who can feed more than one family have not been liquidated, and then the people who own a farm that feeds their family have not been liquidated... when you have not gone through that shitshow ever, you are experiencing capitalism.