Argumentum ad Socialisum

[fli]

Argumentum ad Socialisum...

It's a fallacious illogical attempt to reduce every fucking thing to Socialism...
For example...

Vote Obama = Vote for Socialism
Health Care Reform = Socialism
Tax Reformation = Socialism
Bail Out Companies = Socialism
Sotomayor Confirmation= Socialism
Every Breathe Obama Takes = Socialism...
Every Step Obama Takes = SOCIALISM

For fuck's sake...
IT IS NOT THE ONLY ARGUMENT YOU COULD TAKE AGAINST OR WHATEVER ARGUMENT YOU TAKE.

I'm taking tabs now...
Everyone has 25 Intelligence Points.
Any mention of Socialism = -5 ponts.

Get down to zero, and that means nobody should take you serious if all your arguments boils down to, "OBAMA-DURKA-DURKA-SOCIALISM-DURKA...DUR KA."

Once you get down to negative points, and you're essentially at the same level as guys who see UFO's at Area 51, held conversations with Jesus just last night, stumbled on Illuminati plans for world dominations, and those who carry signs that say, "The End is Nigh!"

Oh... steering an argument away from an argumentum ad Socialisum by making intelligent and compelling arguments for either or for whatever argument that's at hand equals plus ten intelligence points AND plus ten Cool Points.

[Drakim]

Making people post more reasonable posts with less appeals to ridiculous arguments may seem a noble goal, but this is actually the first step towards Socialism. The same tactic was employed in Russia and parts of Europe to desensitize the people so that they would more easily accept socialism in other areas, and then communism.

[Elfer]

Yeah sorry fli but this topic is not happenin'

[TheReno]

Health care reform was a bad thing to bitch about socialist arguements since he wants universal health care which only works in socialist societies.
A vote for Obama isnt a vote for socialism, but if you voted because he was democrat, then you chose a party that has socialistic values, but not socialist itself.
Everything else I guess I agree with you that those cant be made into socialist arguements, except maybe tax reform, but we'll see where that one goes.

[b0b3rt]

So I could say -5 intelligence point for every mention of somebody being a right-wing lunatic (or some other term)?

That happens quite a bit too, you know.

[aviewaskewed]

At 8/11/09 03:17 PM, TheReno wrote: Health care reform was a bad thing to bitch about socialist arguements since he wants universal health care which only works in socialist societies.

So France is Socialist now? Britain is Socialist? Never mind socialist policies in healthcare we already have in place. Like Medicare, SS, and Veterans health aid.

Honestly, I'd rather see people instead of just saying "socialism" like the mere thought of it is evil say what they REALLY mean and say "I fear a dictatorship like in Soviet countries where the government rules all" but oh gee, that would make it sound more like you're tinfoil hat and screw up an easy meme to credibility wouldn't it? Much easier to just say "it's socialism!" and rely on the continually force fed idea to us that socialism is always evil no matter what and will never work.

But as Elfer said fli, this is a nice idea for a thread, but it's not going to change anything for the people that buy into this argument as valid.

[TheShrike]

Yeah, people are gonna totally stop using bad arguements and tactics ALL IN THE NAME OF COOL POINTS.

[TheReno]

At 8/11/09 03:26 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 8/11/09 03:17 PM, TheReno wrote: Health care reform was a bad thing to bitch about socialist arguements since he wants universal health care which only works in socialist societies.

So France is Socialist now? Britain is Socialist? Never mind socialist policies in healthcare we already have in place. Like Medicare, SS, and Veterans health aid.

England isnt socialist? This is news to me. And France has its own weird and convoluted issues. And yeah we have socialistic polices in place in the general health care system, but its not a total socialistic program yet.

Honestly, I'd rather see people instead of just saying "socialism" like the mere thought of it is evil say what they REALLY mean and say "I fear a dictatorship like in Soviet countries where the government rules all" but oh gee, that would make it sound more like you're tinfoil hat and screw up an easy meme to credibility wouldn't it? Much easier to just say "it's socialism!" and rely on the continually force fed idea to us that socialism is always evil no matter what and will never work.

I dont fear socialism, but I like having more money in my pocket and the freedom to control my buisness how I want. Im sorry for think like this were some sort of Free enterprise economy were in.

[fli]

At 8/11/09 03:31 PM, TheShrike wrote: Yeah, people are gonna totally stop using bad arguements and tactics ALL IN THE NAME OF COOL POINTS.

it worked for drinking and smoking
amirite?

[TheReno]

it worked for drinking and smoking
amirite?

No. No you are not right.

[TheShrike]

At 8/11/09 03:38 PM, fli wrote:

At 8/11/09 03:31 PM, TheShrike wrote: Yeah, people are gonna totally stop using bad arguements and tactics ALL IN THE NAME OF COOL POINTS.

it worked for drinking and smoking
amirite?

Smoking, mebbeh. Drinking: what planet do you live on?

Anyway, I'm just trying to point out the irony of using this flimsy logic to combat bad arguments.

[aviewaskewed]

At 8/11/09 03:33 PM, TheReno wrote: I dont fear socialism, but I like having more money in my pocket and the freedom to control my buisness how I want. Im sorry for think like this were some sort of Free enterprise economy were in.

Free enterprise insofar as the bigger enterprises run the smaller ones down. There's already a lot of control in this country anyway, from the government, from big business not to mention our healthcare system DOES NEED A CHANGE (we're 30th overall in the world). Maybe not quite the policy that's been put in front of us, but to act like the system as is isn't broken or doesn't need an overhaul is ludicrous. Politicians on both sides of the aisle can agree on that much at least, we need a change, just maybe not this change.

Sorry, sorry, I'm getting off topic, my apologies. I will stop now :)

[Elfer]

At 8/11/09 03:31 PM, TheShrike wrote: Yeah, people are gonna totally stop using bad arguements and tactics ALL IN THE NAME OF COOL POINTS.

Yeah it's too bad you can't view cool points in user profiles these days.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 8/11/09 03:33 PM, TheReno wrote: England isnt socialist? This is news to me

Seriously? We've not been anything resembling socialist since Margaret thatcher and we started adopting Neo-Liberal agendas of free market enterprise. We've been privatising things left right and centre since then.

When you consider since 1979 we've had Margaret Thatcher and John major as PM's whow ere both right wing Neo-Liberals, and new Labour PM's with Blair and Gordon Brown who have been accused of *Betraying the socialist roots of the labour * you can see why England and Britain as a whole are hardly socialist.

[KeithHybrid]

Flouride in our water = SOCIALCOMMUNISTSCUM!

You left that one out, OP. XD

[b0b3rt]

At 8/11/09 04:42 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:
Seriously? We've not been anything resembling socialist since Margaret thatcher and we started adopting Neo-Liberal agendas of free market enterprise. We've been privatising things left right and centre since then.

When you consider since 1979 we've had Margaret Thatcher and John major as PM's whow ere both right wing Neo-Liberals, and new Labour PM's with Blair and Gordon Brown who have been accused of *Betraying the socialist roots of the labour * you can see why England and Britain as a whole are hardly socialist.

Right, because furthering the ban on weapons, monitoring families without consent in their own homes, and shutting down somebodies 30th birthday party because they were afraid it would turn into a rave isn't socialist at all.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 8/11/09 05:05 PM, b0b3rt wrote:

Right, because furthering the ban on weapons, monitoring families without consent in their own homes, and shutting down somebodies 30th birthday party because they were afraid it would turn into a rave isn't socialist at all.

It's authoriatarian not socialist. You can be authoritarian right wing as well as authoritarian left wing. Currently, the UK is Authoritarian Centre Right.

[b0b3rt]

It's authoriatarian not socialist. You can be authoritarian right wing as well as authoritarian left wing. Currently, the UK is Authoritarian Centre Right.

No, it's not center right. If it was center right it would repeal the bans on guns, privatize health-care, ban abortion and force all gays to undergo "treatment".

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 8/11/09 05:10 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

:At 8/11/09 05:05 PM, b0b3rt wrote:

:Right, because furthering the ban on weapons, monitoring families without consent in their own homes, and shutting down somebodies 30th birthday party because they were afraid it would turn into a rave isn't socialist at all.

It's authoriatarian not socialist. You can be authoritarian right wing as well as authoritarian left wing. Currently, the UK is Authoritarian Centre Right.

Also I'd like to point out that the US has been doing the sort of stuff that you mentioned in your post FOR YEARS. gun control has been a hot issue since at least columbine, monitoring families? Patriot act! And I'm sure you can find evidence of the polcie stopping parties in your local area...

Is the US socialist as well?

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 8/11/09 05:13 PM, b0b3rt wrote:

It's authoriatarian not socialist. You can be authoritarian right wing as well as authoritarian left wing. Currently, the UK is Authoritarian Centre Right.

No, it's not center right. If it was center right it would repeal the bans on guns, privatize health-care, ban abortion and force all gays to undergo "treatment".

What you're listing isn't centre right, but right wing. Centre right is a moderation of those things. We have prvitasation wtihin the NHS, stuff is outsourced to private companies. Bans on abortiona re extreme right wing ideals as is forcing gays to under go ' treatment'.

[TheMason]

At 8/11/09 01:32 PM, fli wrote: Argumentum ad Socialisum...

It's a fallacious illogical attempt to reduce every fucking thing to Socialism...
For example...

Vote Obama = Vote for Socialism

Soon after the election Newsweek ran a cover that said: "We're all socialists now".
Fli=fail (-5 intellect points)

Health Care Reform = Socialism

Currently there are about three bills in the House and two in the Senate. We don't know what the final bill (the one that makes it out of conference committee) will be. Therefore it is too early to tell if labeling it socialist is a logical fallacy.

Fli=too-early-to-tell-fail (-2.5 intellect points)

Tax Reformation = Socialism

If you're talking Laffer curves and fiscal responsibility then Fli is right.
However, if he is talking about taxing the rich then again we're actually right to be labeling this as socialism.

Fli=margin-of-error-fail (+/-5 intellect points)

Bail Out Companies = Socialism

Ummm...this is the very definition of socialism.

Fli=epic fail (-7.5 intellect points)

Sotomayor Confirmation= Socialism

Too early to tell, so:

Fli=too-early-to-tell-fail (-2.5 intellect points)

Every Breathe Obama Takes = Socialism...
Every Step Obama Takes = SOCIALISM

Understanding Fli's legitimate attempt at sarcastic humor=No fail (+5 intellect points

For fuck's sake...
IT IS NOT THE ONLY ARGUMENT YOU COULD TAKE AGAINST OR WHATEVER ARGUMENT YOU TAKE.

I'm taking tabs now...
Everyone has 25 Intelligence Points.
Any mention of Socialism = -5 ponts.

Get down to zero, and that means nobody should take you serious if all your arguments boils down to, "OBAMA-DURKA-DURKA-SOCIALISM-DURKA...DUR KA."

Hmmm...depending on what type of tax reformation you were talking about you are at a 2.5 to 7.5. So then does that mean we should take you only marginally more seriously than the 13yo Communists who come from petty Bourgeoisie families?

Once you get down to negative points, and you're essentially at the same level as guys who see UFO's at Area 51, held conversations with Jesus just last night, stumbled on Illuminati plans for world dominations, and those who carry signs that say, "The End is Nigh!"

Or that think town hall protests are a vast conspiracy...

[poxpower]

Corporations are socialist. A bunch of people working together towards a common goal under a ruler who makes all decisions for the lower man to whom he gives whatever pittance he sees fit? And who can fire you and ruin your life?

Did anyone say Stalin?

And don't get me started about money.

[Fyndir]

At 8/11/09 05:05 PM, b0b3rt wrote: Right, because furthering the ban on weapons

That's an editorial, which proves that the people who wrote it believe in furthering the ban on weapons, but nothing else really.

monitoring families without consent in their own homes

Unreliable bullshit source, have yet to see a single reliable article on this, previously I had searched the internet and found a whopping four articles on the issue, one of which was the Daily Express, two of which sourced the Daily Express and nothing else, and one of which sourced one of the two articles which sourced the Daily Express.

shutting down somebodies 30th birthday party

Which was advertised online as an all night party, and local residents complained about.

Oh no! The police responding to what people want! THOSE SOCIALISTS!!!

[Jizzlebang]

At 8/11/09 05:05 PM, b0b3rt wrote:

Right, because furthering the ban on weapons, monitoring families without consent in their own homes, and shutting down somebodies 30th birthday party because they were afraid it would turn into a rave isn't socialist at all.

Hahaha, you live in a cave you fucking tool. It's not socialist. That didn't even make sense.

[b0b3rt]

At 8/12/09 04:18 PM, Fyndir wrote: That's an editorial, which proves that the people who wrote it believe in furthering the ban on weapons, but nothing else really.

It's still what the party leaders want to do.

Unreliable bullshit source, have yet to see a single reliable article on this, previously I had searched the internet and found a whopping four articles on the issue, one of which was the Daily Express, two of which sourced the Daily Express and nothing else, and one of which sourced one of the two articles which sourced the Daily Express.

Fine, they don't have cameras but they have live workers:
http://www.respect.gov.uk/members/articl e.aspx?id=8678
Also:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/
ripa_iii_figures/

Which was advertised online as an all night party, and local residents complained about.

Oh no! The police responding to what people want! THOSE SOCIALISTS!!!

Actually, police found out that it was advertised on Facebook afterward and used that as justification.
Ok, so if I call the police because I see 15 people having a barbecue at 4 pm, it's ok to arrive body armor, camo, and a helicopter?

[Slizor]

Now most of the posts on this thread can be argued using some form of (insane) logic but this is just plain wrong.

Bail Out Companies = Socialism

Ummm...this is the very definition of socialism.

Fli=epic fail (-7.5 intellect points)

I mean....what!? Just because something doesn't count as free market Capitalism it doesn't mean it's "socialist". One (easy and well-used) definition of Socialism is the advocacy of the "control of the means of production". That is not "the state owning part of privately-run companies that continue the exploitation of workers for profit" or the "state paying money to save the investments of ridiculously rich people", it is the "control of the means of production". If a policy doesn't meet this fairly basic requirement then it shouldn't be considered Socialism.

Just because a policy doesn't match your definition of a concept you throw it into another pile without adequately defining (and understanding) the concept you are assigning it to.

PS: I'm not picking on you Mason, I just saw two posts that angered me and weren't by an idiot.

[SmilezRoyale]

arguing that something is socialist presupposes that Socialism has been debunked.

It has, but no one is willing to admit it, so for all intensive purposes you have to deal with the particular cases of statist stupidity as they come.

[Fyndir]

At 8/12/09 06:30 PM, b0b3rt wrote: It's still what the party leaders want to do.

What a delicious source you have there.

Fine, they don't have cameras but they have live workers:

Can you explain to me how anything in there is socialist?

Socialism:
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Nothing on that page seems to even hint at that, instead it seems to talk about offering help and extending the services currently available in order to improve the overall quality of life for the poorest / most disadvantaged in the country.

Also:

"counter terrorism, child indecency and domestic extremism" cases.

What's socialist about that?

Actually, police found out that it was advertised on Facebook afterward and used that as justification.

Again, delicious source.

[dySWN]

At 8/11/09 05:10 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

At 8/11/09 05:05 PM, b0b3rt wrote:

Right, because furthering the ban on weapons, monitoring families without consent in their own homes, and shutting down somebodies 30th birthday party because they were afraid it would turn into a rave isn't socialist at all.

It's authoriatarian not socialist. You can be authoritarian right wing as well as authoritarian left wing. Currently, the UK is Authoritarian Centre Right.

I can't even imagine how you have to stretch your imagination to come to the conclusion that the UK is center right. The amount of government control of health care and the size of their welfare system in proportion to their GDP puts them squarely on the economic left.

[HandsomePete]

The concept is the same as good ol' fashioned witch-hunting, and if I knew the proper term for this type of groupthink, I'd be a happy camper. You simply take a word that's considered negative to the majority of a population of a group, and use it for everything you possibly can. Of course, you completely dilute the true meaning of the term, but you can generally get enough of the population behind you if you repeat the word often enough.