America Ain’t That Great?

[SuburbanFarmer]

Yeah, I wouldn’t waste time trying to find some innate biological “manliness” related to test - in relation to decision making, sacrifice, maturity, etc. If anything, our society has thoroughly proven that it’s not there. See: soy boys.

Modern first-world women are indeed spoiled children. But that’s a product of our society, not women in general.

You won’t find that kind of drama in areas where women are part of the struggle for survival. They put their heads down and sacrifice, just like the men.

Here in “the west”, we’ve managed to coddle and over protect them to the point of uselessness. This is no different than parental programming.

It’s like we’ve released 100 million Millenials from home, given them a vote, and put them to work, and now we’re shocked that they’re acting like idiots. This will take another generation or two for them to mature into adults - assuming that our society holds together.

[HarryK]

And the same old trope applied to GenX, the baby boomers, WWII gen, and the silent generation and so on and so on.

Let the collective whining commence.

[SuburbanFarmer]

And the same old trope applied to GenX, the baby boomers, WWII gen, and the silent generation and so on and so on.

Let the collective whining commence.

Sure, I’m not talking about Millenials. They suck, but they’ll grow out of it. Some of the things they do really are for the better - very much so.

But I was talking about a more long-term issue with women.

[Martin Hash]

7th-Grade Gym

[HarryK]

And the same old trope applied to GenX, the baby boomers, WWII gen, and the silent generation and so on and so on.

Let the collective whining commence.

Sure, I’m not talking about Millenials. They suck, but they’ll grow out of it. Some of the things they do really are for the better - very much so.

But I was talking about a more long-term issue with women.

Last I checked the female population is the majority and the males a minority. Might be a tad bit careful of lobbing stones at glass houses. Just sayin'.

[BjornP]

We still need a safety net that socialism can provide. We need socialism to maintain a military devoid of mercenary tyrants.

So yeah you definitely know and lived under Socialism far better than me, but in the US socialism is a boogey-man’s term unless it’s your last hope.

Hastur has never lived under Socialism, a "safety net" does not equal Socialism, and I'm not even sure what "military mercenary tyrants" are, but can't see what good Socialism what do about it. Boogeyman terms are bad, sure, but maybe try and find out what something REALLY means, then, instead of deducing that :"If the bad guys say this is bad, it must really be good".

My apologies BjornP. Socialism in the American sense is not the same term as you’ll will find in the economic textbooks or the correct term for Europe. Bear with me for one moment

For example: Ronald Reagan before he was president railled against Medicare providing Healthcare to the elderly via taxpayer dollars. He would state in those records that Medicare would “Destroy Capitalism and send us on the road towards socialism.”

Whenever Social Security, aid to the poor, and things like that gets slashed from the budget, a popular talking point is that we do this in order to not slide into “Socialist tendencies.”

When Nixon abolished the draft, some would say we’ve lost that “Socialistic cohesion” and become mercenaries instead of soldiers.

I’ll fully admit this is not in my wheelhouse whatsoever. But in the US we toss around “Socialism” just as much as we say fuck.

My apologies BjornP.

I'm with Hastur on this, too. Stop apologizing. I don't want it, since it's not me or anyone but yourself your wronging by using a personalized definition of Socialism. My post to you was about how you insisted that "Socialism" had been used a "boogeyman term". Implying that you think that use of the term is wrong. Meaning that you acknowledge the premise that there's a correct, and therefore also in-correct use of the term "Socialism". That you have conservatives with a personalized definition of Socialism, as well as Democrats with their definitions, doesn't change the fact that if all of you grabbed a dictionary - if you could accept its evil "racist" or "Marxist" bias (depending on outlook) - you'd find the proper definition of Socialism written there.

[SuburbanFarmer]

And the same old trope applied to GenX, the baby boomers, WWII gen, and the silent generation and so on and so on.

Let the collective whining commence.

Sure, I’m not talking about Millenials. They suck, but they’ll grow out of it. Some of the things they do really are for the better - very much so.

But I was talking about a more long-term issue with women.

Last I checked the female population is the majority and the males a minority. Might be a tad bit careful of lobbing stones at glass houses. Just sayin'.

I have to say, you seem to have missed the point entirely.

[Martin Hash]

I'm with Hastur on this, too. Stop apologizing. I don't want it, since it's not me or anyone but yourself your wronging by using a personalized definition of Socialism. My post to you was about how you insisted that "Socialism" had been used a "boogeyman term". Implying that you think that use of the term is wrong. Meaning that you acknowledge the premise that there's a correct, and therefore also in-correct use of the term "Socialism". That you have conservatives with a personalized definition of Socialism, as well as Democrats with their definitions, doesn't change the fact that if all of you grabbed a dictionary - if you could accept its evil "racist" or "Marxist" bias (depending on outlook) - you'd find the proper definition of Socialism written there.

Interesting that you should make this argument...

A few years back, I wrote an article about Socialism where I quoted the 3 tenets from the "Socialism" Wikipedia page. That's gone, to be replaced several times with a new explanation, the most recent of which is:

"Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and workers' self-management of the means of production[10] as well as the political theories and movements associated with them.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity.[12] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms."

Notice how it doesn't say "State owns the means of the production," but uses Marxist language, "workers' self-management," and it states there is "no single definition." Americans can be forgiven for not knowing WTF socialism is.

[Speaker to Animals]

Millennials do for American politics what the millineal whoop did to music.

[Hastur]

Wikipedia isn’t a good place to look for established truths. It is a good starting point and has some good sources to explore. That’s about it.