TRtWP is extremely pro-socialism, describing it as “common sense” and “the only remedy” to the ills of society. Orwell does refer to the “socialism of fools,” the support of the idea by naïve elitists who just hate the “hoggishly rich,” but argues they’re not “real” socialists.
-
-
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
How could a feeling person not sympathise with the sights Orwell saw. My family is working class, my father was working at 14. Materially we are infinitely better off, but there are real tragedies around us ever day. My experience homelessness in the UK shocked me beyond words
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
Ofc— that sympathy is what pointed him towards socialism. In a modern, developed country, “socializing” property has the added benefit of ending homelessness, since it eliminates the paywall to acquiring a house. Some Leninist states & Finland have had success with that idea.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
And how was property in Lennist states allocated? By need or given to good party members first? In the UK Unions leaders earning £70k plus live subsidized social housing whilst families earning less than £20k wait. How many homes did Castro, Stalin and Mao have?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
It varies from state to state, it’s usually been handled by some sort of state bureaucracy with all sorts of restrictions. Which I still think is a crappy, broken system, but less crappy and broken than the housing market. They still housed non-party members.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @simon_enefer and
Pretty sure Castro only had one really nice, high-security (thanks, CIA) house, at least in Cuba. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had to move a bunch, though.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
Forbes estimates his family's weath at $900m. The presidency of Cuba must pay well!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
I’m familiar with that figure lol Forbes wouldn’t have any reason to be a bit... liberal woth their estimate there, would they? Like, there isn’t a reason they’d, say, include expenses for the fortification of the President’s Mansion in his net worth? Just wondering
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mediocre_danny @KEEMSTAR and
Even if they are out by a factor of a hundred, is he worthy of respect? I wouldn't trust myself with unlimited power and I certainly wouldn't trust anyone else. How many people would you trust with that much power?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simon_enefer @KEEMSTAR and
I think he’s worthy of some respect, and quite a bit of scorn. His actions in the war were brutal. He implemented harsh censorship policies and other repressive securitarian measures. He lived more lavishly than necessary. But you can say all that about Lincoln. But...
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
1. There is merit to your argument. The previous administration wasn't exactly run by Ghandi. I think on Lincoln he was a much more authoritarian leader than people like to remember, however worthy the motives.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.