|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 27, 2005 16:05:58 GMT -5
Webster's 1913 Dictionary Definition: \Con*serv"a*tive\, a. [Cf. F. conservatif.] 1. Having power to preserve in a safe of entire state, or from loss, waste, or injury; preservative.
2. Tending or disposed to maintain existing institutions; opposed to change or innovation.
3. Of or pertaining to a political party which favors the conservation of existing institutions and forms of government, as the Conservative party in England; -- contradistinguished from {Liberal} and {Radical}.
We have always been conscientiously attached to what is called the Tory, and which might with more propriety be called the Conservative, party. --Quart. Rev. (1830).
{Conservative system} (Mech.), a material system of such a nature that after the system has undergone any series of changes, and been brought back in any manner to its original state, the whole work done by external agents on the system is equal to the whole work done by the system overcoming external forces. --Clerk Maxwell.
\Con*serv"a*tive\, n. 1. One who, or that which, preserves from ruin, injury, innovation, or radical change; a preserver; a conserver.
The Holy Spirit is the great conservative of the new life. --Jer. Taylor.
2. One who desires to maintain existing institutions and customs; also, one who holds moderate opinions in politics; -- opposed to revolutionary or radical.
3. (Eng. Hist.) A member of the Conservative party.
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 27, 2005 17:03:49 GMT -5
A person who keeps something that works.
Other than some who change like the blowing wind.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 27, 2005 21:16:13 GMT -5
check this out:
Ted Turner Calls Fox a 'Propaganda Voice'
By KEN RITTER
LAS VEGAS (AP) - CNN founder Ted Turner has called the Fox television network a ``propaganda voice'' of the Bush administration and compared Fox News Channel's popularity to Adolf Hitler's rise in Germany before World War II.
Turner, in a speech Tuesday to the National Association of Television Programming Executives, also targeted ``gigantic companies whose agenda goes beyond broadcasting'' for timidity in challenging the Bush White House.
``There's one network, Fox, that's a propaganda voice for them,'' the cable news pioneer said. ``It's certainly legal. But it does pose problems for our democracy when the news is 'dumbed-down.'''
Fox News in New York issued a statement saying, ``Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network and now his mind - we wish him well.''
Turner, 66, stepped down as vice chairman of AOL Time Warner in May 2003.
During a question-and-answer session moderated by former CNN anchorman Bernard Shaw, Turner called it ``not necessarily a bad thing'' that Fox ratings top CNN and other cable news networks.
``Adolf Hitler was more popular in Germany in the early '30s than ... people that were running against him,'' Turner said in remarks videotaped by conference administrators. ``So just because you're bigger doesn't mean you're right.''
Convention spokeswoman Michelle Mikoljak said the association had no comment about Turner's comments.
Turner heads an Atlanta-based philanthropic and business empire.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jan 27, 2005 22:37:34 GMT -5
Hmm, let's see, socialism is a world wide failure. Of the G7 nations, the wealthiest nations in the world, let us examine their economic systems. America - highly capitalist with some socialist influence Canada - moderately socialist UK - Moderately socialist France - highly socialist Germany - highly socialist Italy - highly socialist Japan - moderately capitalist Hmm, oh yeah, socialism is a complete failure. When 5 of the 7 wealthiest nations in the world are socialist, I don't think you can consider socialism a failure. Also considering the EU, an economic block equivalent to the US in both population and economic power, is predominately socialist, I'm still not quite sure how socialism has failed. Communism, now that failed. Got no problems with that arguement. Communism, as practiced by Russia and China has certainly failed. But, despite what some claim, socialism is NOT communism. Note, none of the above is pure opinion. It is pretty much fact.
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 28, 2005 10:25:02 GMT -5
Communism isn't a failure, because true communism has never been tried. Because, with humans it work work. Back to the dictionary
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 28, 2005 10:44:03 GMT -5
Speaking of socalism it reminds me of of a question. Since terrorism is an accepted part of the the left. I have seen plenty of political higher up's on the left defend terrorist. (Just to save time, no, terrorist have no right at all.)
How do you get rid of the terrorist? (other than sticking your head in the sand and pretending it isn't a problem)
|
|
|
Post by Challenger on Jan 28, 2005 10:46:54 GMT -5
Well talking to them and actualy coming up with a mutaly benificial settlement seems to work
ie Northen Ireland
yes its slow, yes its not entirely there yet and shock horror it helps if you actualy care why their pissed at you but the last terrorist attack in Ireland was a while ago now.
Challenger
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 28, 2005 13:25:17 GMT -5
Speaking of socalism it reminds me of of a question. Since terrorism is an accepted part of the the left. It is? Prove that please. Really? Give examples please. We shouldn't be there, but we are. We're there because we bombed the hell out of em. We could have left, there were several ways, but we (Bush) wanted full control, now it's such a mess. We can't leave it that way. You make a mess you have to clean it up. First - Get rid of Bush *the world begins to like us again* Second - Confess our failure to the world through the UN and ask for help. or We keep going the way we are andwe could become one of the poorest nations in the world in ten years. Give or take a few... And guess what - the terrorist wins.
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 28, 2005 14:26:06 GMT -5
TRICK QUESTION, We know the left would never try and get rid of terrorism?
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 28, 2005 14:28:46 GMT -5
TRICK QUESTION, We know the left would never try and get rid of terrorism?� Depending on the situation and the sway of the people.
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jan 29, 2005 8:33:55 GMT -5
To quote Red Forman, "Dumbass". Try writing a question next time and maybe we'll answer it. Writing statements and then calling them questions doesn't work. Then again, it's kind of like the weapons of mass destruction, they're only there because neo cons say they are.
Hmm, let's take a look at situations where terrorism was actually ended.
Palestine - Israeli terrorists murder and bomb civilians for several years. The British hand over Israel to the Israelis and terrorism, at least by the Israelis against the British, stops.
Northern Ireland - instead of denying Catholics the right to vote and own land, England decides to give them the vote, their own parliament and enacts a number of laws to bring the Catholic population in line with the Protestant. Result - terrorism pretty much ends.
Hmm, where in the world are we seeing daily terrorist attacks and why are they being made? (see Gal, adding one of the 5 W's to a sentence turns it into a question)
((Also note, Gal is incapable of refuting the fact that socialism works quite well in many countries, just not in America, despite his ravings.))
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 29, 2005 9:22:30 GMT -5
Part 1
What is Democratic Socialism? Questions and Answers from the Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives. Democracy and socialism go hand in hand. All over the world, wherever the idea of democracy has taken root, the vision of socialism has taken root as well—everywhere but in the United States. Because of this, many false ideas about socialism have developed in the US. With this pamphlet, we hope to answer some of your questions about socialism. Doesn’t socialism mean that the government will own and run everything? Democratic Socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect. Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them. Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic Socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives. Democratic Socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned. While we believe that democratic planning can shape major social investments like mass transit, housing, and energy, market mechanisms are needed to determine the demand for many consumer goods. Hasn’t socialism been discredited by the collapse of Communism in the USSR and Eastern Europe? Socialists have been among the harshest critics of authoritarian Communist states. Just because their bureaucratic elites called them “socialist” did not make it so; they also called their regimes “democratic.” We applaud the authentic democratic revolutions that have transformed the former Communist bloc. We also expect that the socialist parties that are reemerging in Eastern Europe will be essential in the struggle to protect workers’ rights, to ensure equality for women, and to promote social justice. The improvement of people’s lives requires real democracy without ethnic rivalries and/or new forms of authoritarianism. Democratic Socialists will continue to play a key role in that struggle throughout the world. The fall of Communism should not blind us to injustices at home. We cannot allow all radicalism to be dismissed as “Communist.” That suppression of dissent and diversity undermines America’s ability to live up to its promise of equality of opportunity. What is Democratic Socialism? Questions and Answers from the Democratic Socialists of America 2 What Is Democratic Socialism? Q Q Q Private corporations seem to be a permanent fixture in the US, so why work towards socialism? In the short term we can’t eliminate private corporations, but we can bring them under greater democratic control. The government could use regulations and tax incentives to encourage companies to act in the public interest and outlaw destructive activities such as exporting jobs to low-wage countries and polluting our environment. Public pressure can also have a critical role to play in the struggle to hold corporations accountable. Most of all, socialists look to unions make private business more responsible. Won’t socialism be impractical because people will lose their incentive to work? We don’t agree with the capitalist assumption that starvation or greed are the only reasons people work. People enjoy their work if it is meaningful and enhances their lives. They work out of a sense of responsibility to their community and society. Although a long-term goal of socialism is to eliminate all but the most enjoyable kinds of labor, we recognize that unappealing jobs will long remain. These tasks would be spread among as many people as possible rather than distributed on the basis of class, race, ethnicity, or gender, as they are under capitalism. And this undesirable work should be among the best, not the least, rewarded work within the economy. For now, the burden should be placed on the employer to make work desirable by raising wages, offering benefits and improving the work environment. In short, we believe that a combination of social, economic, and moral incentives will motivate people to work. Why are there no models of democratic socialism? Although no country has fully instituted democratic socialism, the socialist parties and labor movements of other countries have won many victories for their people. We can learn from the comprehensive welfare state maintained by the Swedes, from Canada’s national health care system, France’s nationwide childcare program, and Nicaragua’s literacy programs. Lastly, we can learn from efforts initiated right here in the US, such as the community health centers created by the government in the 1960s. They provided high quality family care, with community involvement in decision-making. But hasn’t the European Social Democratic experiment failed? For over half a century, the nations of Western Europe have enjoyed both tremendous prosperity and relative economic equality thanks to the policies pursued by social democratic and labor parties. These nations used their relative wealth to insure a high standard of living for their citizens—high wages, health care and subsidized education. Most importantly, these states supported strong labor movements that became central players in economic decision-making. But with the globalization of capitalism, the old social democratic model becomes ever harder to maintain. Stiff competition from low-wage labor markets in developing countries and the constant fear that industry will move to avoid taxes and strong labor regulations has diminished (but not eliminated) the ability of nations to launch ambitious economic reform on their own. Social democratic reform must now happen at the international level. Multinational corporations must be brought under democratic controls, and workers’ organizing efforts must reach across borders. Now, more than ever, socialism is an international movement. As socialists have always known, the welfare of working people in Finland or California depends largely on standards in Italy or Indonesia. As a result, we must envision reforms that can withstand the power of multinationals and global banks, and we must imagine a world order that is not controlled by bankers and bosses.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 29, 2005 9:25:47 GMT -5
Part II
Q Q Q Aren’t you a party that’s in competition with the Democratic Party for votes and support? No, we are not a separate party. Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious, and community organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party. We work with those movements to strengthen the party’s left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The process and structure of American elections seriously hurts third party efforts. Winner-take-all elections instead of proportional representation, rigorous party qualification requirements that vary from state to state, a presidential instead of a parliamentary system, and the two-party monopoly on political power have doomed third party efforts. Maybe sometime in the future, in coalition with our allies, an alternative national party will be viable. For now, we will continue to support progressives who have a real chance at winning elections, which usually means left-wing Democrats. If I am going to devote time to politics, why shouldn’t I focus on something more immediate? Although capitalism will be with us for a long time, reforms we win now—raising the minimum wage, securing a national health plan, and demanding passage of right-to-strike legislation—can bring us closer to socialism. Many democratic socialists actively work in the single-issue organizations that advocate for those reforms. We are visible in the reproductive freedom movement, the fight for student aid, gay and lesbian organizations, anti-racist groups, and the labor movement. It is precisely our socialist vision that informs and inspires our day-to-day activism for social justice. As socialists we bring a sense of the interdependence of all struggles for justice. No single-issue organization can truly challenge the capitalist system or adequately secure its particular demands. In fact, unless we have a vision of a world without oppression, each fight for reforms will be disconnected, maybe even self-defeating. What can young people do to move the US towards socialism? Since the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s, young people have played a critical role in American politics. They have been a tremendous force for both political and cultural change in this country: in limiting the US’s options in the war in Vietnam, in forcing corporations to divest from the racist South African regime, in reforming Universities, and in bringing issues of sexual orientation and gender discrimination to public attention. Though none of these struggles were fought by young people alone, they all featured youth as leaders in multi-generational progressive coalitions. Young people are needed in today’s struggles as well: for universal health care and stronger unions, against welfare cuts and irresponsible multinational corporations. Schools, Colleges and Universities are important to American political culture. They are the places where ideas are formulated and policy discussed and developed. Being an active part of that discussion is a critical job for young socialists. We have to work hard to change people’s misconceptions about socialism, to broaden political debate, and to fight the cynicism and apathy all political groups face on campuses today. Off-campus, too, in our daily cultural lives, young people can be turning the tide against racism, sexism and homophobia, as well as the conservative myth of the virtue of greed. 4 What Is Democratic Socialism? Q If so many people misunderstand socialism, why continue to use the word? First, we call ourselves socialists because we are proud of what we are. Second, no matter what we call ourselves, conservatives will use it against us. Anti-socialism has been repeatedly used to attack reforms that shift power to working class people and away from corporate capital. In 1993, national health insurance was attacked as “socialized medicine” and defeated. Liberals are routinely denounced as socialists in order to discredit reform. Until we face, and beat, the stigma attached to the “S word,” politics in America will continue to be stifled and our options limited. We also call ourselves socialists because we are proud of the traditions upon which we are based, of the heritage of the Socialist Party of Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas, and of other struggles for change that have made America more democratic and just. Finally, we call ourselves socialists to remind everyone that we have a vision of a better world.
|
|
|
Post by khyron1144 on Feb 3, 2005 13:31:08 GMT -5
Thanks khyron1144, good responce. Not saying I agree with it all, but a good responce. Thanks Gal. I believe that qualifies me to ask you a question. I'll give you two, you can pick which one you like better: 1) If Bush is so much better than Clinton, then why was a two-volume punk compilation called Rock Against Bush available just before the '04 election, while no one bothered with such a thing against Clinton in the '96 election? or 2) Care to tell me where my thinking is wrong-headed so far here: shadowdragons69.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=WyrmDen&action=display&n=1&thread=997
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Feb 3, 2005 13:47:29 GMT -5
Oh I'll do both. Your kidding right. Who would these guys complain about other than bush to get them some attention. I think it's funny though, The Oscars snubned Stupid fat white guy Moore. Not saying I don't believe the oscars are fixed, I do. But are they not Moore's people. shadowdragon.kelticmoose.com/smilies/lol.gif[/img]I don't think the world sucks, just life in general. (Personally I think the Universe is out to get me. Why think small) Can't argue with you on alot of you you put up. I tell people that life will knock you on your ass. If you get up you will just get knocked down again. The trick is, learn who to dodge. Of course this is just a saying. There are pently of problems in the world. Why don't we fix them? After travelling about I learned, people don't want to. Most are just concerntain with there own little world.
|
|