Biggest issue if the government shuts down?

[Spider]

[The Comrade]

the dictionary is a horrible source when trying to define intellectual concepts. there is so much more to ideas like socialism, or deontology, or Realism, or whatever, than the one or two sentences in a dictionary. it's why real people who aren't intellectually disingenuous often go to primary source material when defining concepts like those mentioned.

how is this even up for debate?

[PoS]

And yet there are people trying to define "conservative" using the GOP and TP too...

[JDHURF]

[Spider]

[Spider]

[JDHURF]

The only part I left out was the following: "(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism." I did so not because it damaged my argument, but because it is perfectly irrelevant one way or the other.

I did not claim that the Oxford definition was incorrect. I observed that your esteemed wikipedia source (a curious source for someone who implies that they have exhaustively studied the subject) was incorrect about the variety of definitions being equivalently valid with the illustrative example that words that do not actually exist or are technically grammatically incorrect (the specific reference was 'irregardless') will be placed within the dictionary simply by virtue of the fact that a large segment of the ignorant, illiterate English speaking public uses them. Shame to see you throw in with the likes.

[The Dude]

Obama signed the law.

The GOP got nothing out of it. Literally nothing. They lost in every single way. What a bunch of clowns.

The Dems got the budget committee they've asked for 6 months.




What a waste of money and time and effort this was. And no, the GOP will not shutdown the gov't next year. They're dumb, very dumb, but not that dumb yet. I think.

[Spider]

Where you messed up was in claiming that, "Socialism is either voluntary or it is not socialism, by definition."

By definition, (There are several very similar definitions posted you can refer to) being voluntary is not a requisite.

As I pointed out, socialism, being an economic system, can be tailored to work with various political systems, goes quite well with coercion, and doesn't by definition, as you stated, require everyone to play along. Everything can be collectively owned easily enough, or collectively managed, easily enough, though, at least according to the definition we both posted, both conditions are also not required.

Thats the problem with making such sweeping, absolute statements. Its all actually very loose. You believe socialism can't happen unless its all voluntary. It does not follow that you are right about that, or that everyone agrees with you.

[The Dharma Bum]

No, you are willfully ignorant spider