Talk Elections

Let us correct the record, shall we?

() (http://s30.photobucket.com/user/tnfx1991/media/fedplat_zpsce8d5583.png.html)

The Truth:

() (http://s30.photobucket.com/user/tnfx1991/media/labposter_zps1c5e2f1f.jpg.html)

and with those who can't find work
let's not forget

And late term abortions, and criminal thugs who deal and use drugs. Yes, those are veritable working class values too now!

Shut up, Oxford.

Working class kids can't go to Oxford now? Are working class children not worthy enough for a university education?
Policies like the ones you are propagating are why working class communities now vote for Right-Wingers for President. I feel sorry for your hard working Midwest constituents.

You are a class traitor.

y u mad tho

Supporting working communities also means sharing their values. The Labor Party's social platform needs to be altered from it's Neoliberal tripe.

The working classes are the ones that suffer most from the failed war on drugs, Hifly.

It's the great contradiction of the modern left. They preach caring for the country's most vulnerable, and hand its babies to butchers and its children to drug pushers.

We Federalists believe in helping the working man by getting out of the way of job creators wherever possible, lowering taxes, and opposing nationalization of any industry.

So tell me just, in what way does nationalizing industries to a worker-owned cooperative help the working man less than your proposal?

>pretending that any of you Fedoralists give a sh**t about the most vulnerable

Translation: We believe in "helping" the working man by turning him fully into a slave

Logical fallacy. If you believe that nationalization will help anyone, the burden of proof is on you to justify that position.

OK - I'll give you my point of view. I'd like to see JCL's too, though.
In my opinion, worker-owned cooperatives in the industry finally give the workers a real voice. Then, there would be no need anymore for unions or strikes, as the workers (here are of course also included managers) get to decide what the business does or does not. Usually, workers know what the business needs. There will of course still be managment positions, but now the managers would be chosen by the workers, and not by the guy whose great-grandfather had the luck to be a descendant of some "noble" (Europe) or of some rich English dude ('Murica). 

eh
we have basic income.
workers have a lot more leverage than they used to.
but yes, the notion that getting out of the way of "job creators" would help workers is patently absurd.

Our basic income is actually not so much a universal thing, though, which is what I would like to see it become. It's still a welfare program at present.

Here's my biggest problem with socialism, you presume that all people are the same. This just isn't the case. Different people have different talents and skills. Different people have different skills and some of those skills are rarer than others. Socialism doesn't push people to do better and learn new skills. It pushes people down to the lowest common denominator. A good surgeon is harder to come by than a janitor, and their actions have bigger repercussions if something goes wrong. Thus the deserve to be paid more than a janitor.  Every one has value, but we must push for learning and progress in individual lives as well.

DAE Harrison Bergeron

Don't you have sock accounts to operate or something?

1. Do you believe that every industry should be forced to adopt this model?

2. What if the workers decide to use their monopoly to massively jack up prices?

Why does labor only represent white men who look like Nazi ideal people? ???

No, I like taking credit for what I say.
Also, I merely presented my problem with socialism, if want to rebut that fine, but please don't resort to petty personal attacks.

Labor stands for good graphic design, much of which was unfortunately created in less tolerant times.

That poster is actually an edit of one originally produced by the Party of Marxist Unification (POUM) during the Spanish Civil War, IIRC.

1. I'd say not every single one at the same time. We could try it with some industries, and if its working well, then expand it; if not, let it be.

2. There won't be a monopoly - there will still be competition between different factories in one industry. Not every workplace in one industry will be owned by all workers in the total industry, but just by the workers of that workplace. (That's at least how I want it to be)

So - If you have other questions for me, post them here or PM me, I'm off to bed and will answer them tomorrow :)

No TNF, forced unionization is slouching towards serfdom and that's the cream of your policies.

Also, is "Fedoralist Party" a witty pun or a typo or both?

jesus christ fix the page Alfred jesus

Alfred is the Atlasian equivalent of a malevolent deity.

I thought the olololols would respect the concept of continuing onto another line :(

srry bby

Bingo.

Also why Alfred.

Quoting yourself doesn't make it better.

I tried to click the modify button :(.

And y'all can always scroll to the right.

Quite a surprise, this post is, considering the source.  DC, I know you're neither ignorant nor narrow-minded enough to make such an asinine, strawman-filled comment like you just did.  So, why don't we give you a chance to retract it?

Please note that Labor used a 30's Communist poster and remade it for their needs.
But what is Communism? Communism advocates no ideals, it is not even an ideology. It's just a form of  common robbery, which differs from the ordinary crimes by having a slight political edge. Even Marx, Engels and Lenin saw communism as a "social formation" that will equally satisfy biological and physiological needs of all people, because these extreme materialist bastards didn't recognized anything beyond it. There's nothing spiritual or moral in communism, even in theory. Ideal "communist society" is a prison, where everybody gets equal treatment and protection. Every bum in the gutter or a criminal on the streets is a potential communist.
And I would like Labor to answer this question: is this the goal you're trying to achieve using a cheap remake of the most vile ideologies ever's poster?

I shall do no such thing. One of the great unifiers of the left is a woman's right to murder her unborn child.

>calls communism the "most vile ideology ever"
>is a Nazi

I don't understand why we pro-choicers and pro-lifers can't just get along, but then again, I don't understand the pro-lifers point of view in general. If you don't support abortions, just don't get one. I don't support a lot of things, but I'm not here to tell people they can't do things I don't support!

Once again, RIP Era of Good Feeling :(

...no.

Here we go again. Yes, I indeed made some controversial statements in the past, but I already apologized for them.
I never supported any National Socialist ideas and most of my support for far-right in Europe is a protest vote against the pro-Brussels establishment. If you believe that not believing leftist propaganda is equal to Nazism, I have bad news for you, TNF.

So, you're fine with me saying that a great unifier of the right is to push women's rights back to the 19th century?

In social terms DC does have a point Scott. Abortion rights are a unifying point of modern leftists. Rightists are quite divided with regards to woman's rights excluding abortion.

Yes, I realize that, but I found the way he phrased it to be offensive and, frankly, immature.  I also don't know where the idea of leftists handing children to "drug pushers" comes from.

(Though in all honesty, I had a pretty awful night last night, so I was more apt to get angered over things I normally wouldn't take too personally.)

We've all been in that place at one time or another.