These days you need to have "that talk" with your children.

These days you need to have "that talk" with your children.  | "MOM, I WANT TO BE A SOCIALIST WHEN I GROW UP." "WHICH IS IT SON? YOU CAN'T DO BOTH." | image tagged in mother and son,parental advice,growing up,socialism,memes | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
7,356 views, 121 upvotes, Made by james3v6 8 months ago mother and sonparental advicegrowing upsocialismmemes
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
10 ups, 1 reply
Expanding Brain Meme | WORK FOR IT COMPLAIN UNTIL YOU GET IT BE BORN WITH IT HAVE EVERYONE ELSE PAY FOR IT | image tagged in memes,expanding brain | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
This is the socialist mindset
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
Expanding Brain Meme | PRIVATE CORPORATIONS CAN’T BE TRUSTED WITH THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION HOW BOUT EVERYONE OWNS THEM | image tagged in memes,expanding brain | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
I think it is more like this ;D
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Keep dreaming
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Bad Luck Brian Meme | DREAMS ABOUT LIVING IN A SOCIALIST PARADISE VENEZUELA | image tagged in memes,bad luck brian | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
I was just joking about what is the socialist mindset. I didn’t mean to imply it is something I believe is correct.
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/20k66k.jpg (click to show)
upvote!
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
BUT THEY’RE ALL EQUAL NO DIVISION BETWEEN HAVES AND HAVE NOTS. THEY ALL HAVE NOT | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Some socialists are more equal than others. | YOUR HOUSE ON SOCIALISM YOUR POLITICIAN'S HOUSE ON SOCIALISM | image tagged in 2018,redistribution,socialism,animal farm,political memes,memes | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Upvote!
Some socialists are more equal than others.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Could easily say the same about Capitalism, or religion; replacing "politician" with "internet provider", "gas provider", "pope", or "ayatollah".
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
You are exactly right!
No arguments from me on your point!
I concede that unequivocally 100%!
Now if you could just get into your mind the reprehensible history of socialists systems you would see there is no merit in even attempting that type of philosophy in America.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I have noticed the flaws in socialism. One thing, politicians can step it up to the dangerous communism. That's why I don't support socialism directly.
1 up
i.imgflip.com/2idrq.gif (click to show)
That's awesome that you recognize the "good intentions" of redistribution can turn into full blown communism.
Now if you could just understand the benefits of capitalism, which comes with disparity in wealth and resources, far out weigh the possible benefits of "democratic socialism" that "intends" to do away with those disparities (among the public sector anyway.)
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Capitalism does have its benefits, but some of those benefits depend on putting faith in the rich, such as depending on the rich to share some of their money to the lower classes. Trickle-down economics has been a ideal economic solution for a while, but has never worked in practice.
0 ups
I don't "have faith in the rich." I don't have to trust them to do anything than what they normally do.
I understand that they play a role in a healthy economy because poor people don't start businesses, invest money, or pay the majority of taxes. (The top one percent of earners Bernie and others are always talking about pay the majority of taxes.)

"Trickle-down doesn't work," what does that mean? To your liking? Who gets to determine that, the liberal socialist leaning politicians who play on the greed of their constituents to get elected?
reply
[deleted]
8 ups, 2 replies
reply
10 ups, 2 replies
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Then what happens when two more lambs come along?

The republic we have is nothing more than a proxy democracy. Instead of (for example) one million people each having a vote, we have one hundred people who represent ten thousand people each. It breaks down more or less the same at the end of the day.

How is one hundred million liberals and one hundred million conservatives each having a vote any different than fifty liberal representatives and fifty conservative representatives each having a vote? Either way it's close to a 50/50 split much of the time.
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Hegel would put your concepts on the slaughter block of history.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Of course that is what Hegel would do - as would all opponents of liberty.

And you also are wrong:

From our bylaws, the Consitution: Article IV, Section 4: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,"

From our Charter, the Declaration: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it"

Thomas Jefferson: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine" and "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Alexander Hamilton: "We are now forming a Republican form of government. Real liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments.

John Adams: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”

George Washington: "To be prepared for war, is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace." and "Unhappy it is though to reflect, that a Brother's Sword has been sheathed in a Brother's breast, and that, the once happy and peaceful plains of America are either to be drenched with Blood, or Inhabited by Slaves. Sad alternative! But can a virtuous Man hesitate in his choice?"
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Liberal Democracy = freedom

Democratic Republic = liberty

Constitutional Republicanism = bunch of overfed dumbasses riding around in pick-ups with gun racks and inventing new forms of political thought they'll never fully understand themselves so that they have an excuse to feed their cattle on public rangeland at below-market prices.

The question isn't what men who lived 240+ years ago really thought, it's what they would think of the people who talk freedom but attempt to restrict the franchise and deny Americans' liberties in the name of some vague idea of patriotism that has more to do with their own selfish prejudices than a document that few of them have ever bothered to read. If Jefferson were alive today I have little doubt he would be as bothered by modern conservatism as he was by King George III and the British parliament's denial of colonists' votes.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Nothing says freedom like taking away guns.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
[{pssst, there's a few more lines in the Constitution, some other Ammendments even, I swear. In fact, rumor has it, that lil' document is about the rights of something called people - American people (what yous call 'Muricans) - and not just the Go***MNED divine sacred inalienable rights of oppressed guns}]
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
2 ups
I know, I know, lefto collegiate MSM lies, but they do say:

1. The Injuns ain't attacking our muskets headfirst anymore.

2. The Nehgrus aren't running away from the plantation on account of this Emmancipation Proclamation whatchamacallit which gave them this Liberty Right thingy.

3. The British ARE coming. To see the Christmas tree in Rockefeller Center, NYC.
1 up
i.imgflip.com/1qb442.gif (click to show)
reply
1 up, 2 replies
How does this have nothing to do with the subject at hand? I mean seriously! You talk about the Constitution as if freedom is only found in it and then turn around and say that it has nothing to do with the discussion! I'm done with you type of people!
1 up
If you take notice, I have not nor will I ever reply to jack_henoff again. I learned long ago that there is NO reasoning with this person.
He labels people "fascists" and "Russian sympathizers" and seems to support every talking point of the Left but disavows being a liberal/Democrat/leftist.
He doesn't affirm any of the positions of liberty.
I don't know what he thinks he is, maybe he is just a troll. I could respect that, but I don't feed the trolls. I just ignore him no matter what type of vile and bile he spews. Just ignore him because that will get under his skin. There are many others just like jack.
1 up
You tell me how it does.

And no, I did not say that.

If you need permission from a piece of paper to pretend you're free, then you ain't.
reply
1 up, 3 replies
I'm just getting started. It appears that many Democrats think that religion is the problem (1st amendment) and rapists do not deserve due process (amendment 5, and I will admit that many Republicans do too with terrorists). That's just with the bill of rights. In article 1, section 8, the powers of Congress are fully defined, and they do not include enforcing workplace diversity or cap-in-trade. The Constitution has become so irrelevant to liberals that when former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked, regarding Obamacare, where in the document Congress is granted the power to force people to buy health insurance, she asked incredulously, “Are you serious? Are you serious?” I don't beleive the Constitution is perfect, but I do beleive that only the people should decide when you can bend it's rules, and if the american people really think that you can bend the rules of this document so far that it loses meaning all in the name of "freedom" and "liberty," then there should be no problem getting 3/4 of Congress to pass it.
1 up
This is how much the left really respected the constitution before that "monster" Trump came along (and now all of a sudden they are for the constitution again)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSqUUvEHjng

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-its-time-to-repeal-the-second-amendment-right-bear-arms-20160613
1 up
I know that you probably are going to say I'm stereotyping, but after basically calling me a redneck because I think that gun control violates the second amendment, I wouldn't be talking.
1 up
Copy/paste, always impressive, especially when non pertinent to the subject at hand.
Always a delight also to see the lemmings turn on the tardo switch while Dictator Don & Rebubots chuck the Constitution up our asses for safekeeping.
reply
2 ups
https://goo.gl/images/7r4566
reply
2 ups
Only on election day...
reply
4 ups, 3 replies
Aren't laws passed by a majority of lawmakers? So it still comes back to majority rule, even if that majority is comprised of elected officials and not the entire populace.
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Majority does not rule - they cannot override the God-given constitutional protected rights of We, the People. "A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void" - Chief Justice John Mashall.

If your local government passed a law requiring you to prostitute yourself, would you comply? Would it be lawful? Would you resist with force?
reply
4 ups
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Before the 13th amendment slaves could be forced into prostitution and that was seen as legal under the constitution.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
It really shouldn't have been. Under the Constitution, we have the freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If you ask me, I can't think of a single thing that means liberty more than the enslavement of people and forced prostitution.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Um, WOT?

NEWS FLASH: It's 2017. The Nehgrus ain't about to be reinslaved again, even if you think their freedom impedes on your liberty.
reply
1 up
Huh? What's that? It appears that nobody has replied to my comment. Huh.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Hint: sarcasm exists
0 ups
As I explained to you on that other thread?
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
There are Presidents who are directly elected and serves as both state and government. Try Mexico and most other central and south American countries (all mostly third world hotbeds of political corruption).
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
Here is a civics lesson for you, snowflake. In the US we elect our congressman, who make our laws and keep checks on the President. We indirectly elect our President (our chief of both state and government). A national popular vote just electing the President (like you want) would truly be wrong for the country. Heck, even the popular vote in Presidential elections doesn't always reflect the will of the majority of the voters. In this last Presidential election, the popular vote winner (despite your insistence that Hillary winning 48% of the vote is a majority) won less than a majority of the vote (below 50%) and the winner of the electoral college didn't even win a plurality of the vote. A majority didn't vote for either Hillary nor Donald Trump. We are a federal republic of individual states and the electoral college was designed to give each state an individual voice in electing the highest chief of state and government.

If you look at other developed countries, they largely operate the same way. The Prime Minister of the UK is not directly elected by the voters either. The winner of the post of Prime Minister is the leader of the party which wins the most seats in the lower House of Commons in a direct election. As a result, the Prime Minister isn't always the winner of the nationwide popular vote either as a party can win the most seats in the House of Commons without winning the nationwide popular vote as they are elected much like our House of Representatives. The chosen PM also has to have the approval of the non-elected monarch with whom he shares power with. The Queen on the other hand is the non-elected, ceremonial head of state and as a member of no political party in the UK serves as a symbol of unity. The PM forms and heads the national government. This is also seems to be working out pretty well for them (unlike the US who has a national leader who serves as both head of state and government and is a member of a political party). The UK is certainly a lot less politically divided.than the US is for sure.

This isn't just the UK. Even in places like France and Ireland, who does elect their President by popular vote, the President still only serves a mostly ceremonial role as chief of state while an indirectly elected Prime Minister (much like the UK) serves as the head of the national government (and is not always of the same party as the President).
reply
0 ups
Your comment was informative, so why was that opening "snowflake" jab necessary?
reply
0 ups
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Basically, we shouldn't let young people think for themselves.. right? What a free nation this is.
reply
4 ups, 4 replies
Perhaps you misunderstood my reference and argument.
My reference was to the United Federation of Planets from Star Trek, which is based on the notion of a socialist "utopia." To it is a good argument that a socialist "utopia" as envisioned only works in science fiction/fantasy.

My argument is that allowing children to think for themselves (caveat: only after presenting them with all the facts) will prevent them from accepting that there is any merit in attempting to sustain a socialist system.

The only reason young people today think there is any merit in socialism is because they have not been presented with all the facts regarding socialist systems, and because it has become "hip" and "trendy" since the last election cycle in the US. For some they still want to put the modifier "democratic" in front of socialist like that actually changes anything.

I think that our constitutional, representative republic can be better but I definitely don't want a "democracy" where the majority of people who are leftist, liberals, or lean towards socialism get to impose their opinions and desires on the rest of us. Hence the electoral college: New York and LA don't get to decide the way the rest of the country is governed.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
Perhaps you and the OP should WATCH the show before erroneously criticizing someone who actually did.

[{"BUT ALEX JONES SAID IT WAS COMMIE SHOW!}]

Because in space, no one can hear you scream even when you have egg on your face.

Jus' sayin'
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Maybe. I may have taken the image of Captain Picard out of context. However, I don't think the United Federation of Planets is a socialist utopia. I find it more like the United States as the members of Starfleet go out exploring as to promote democracy and peace to other races throughout the galaxy.

I wouldn't say I'm a steadfast socialist, nor would I say there is some hip and trendiness in socialism from our last election (if anything, there are more dank memes about the Soviet National Anthem than socialist hipsters). If anything, the reason behind Capitalism being rejected among our modern day political cycles would be the advantages capitalism has over poor people. As a result, we have to conform to something in between capitalism and a system that shares wealth; that being socialism.

If anything, America would be better as a democracy because, A) Foreign policy is supposed to promote Democracy, and B) if the liberals are the majority, then it'd better represent the people. New York and Los Angeles have more people per square mile than a rural area in Kansas would.
reply
0 ups
No, you did not.
The United Federation of Planets
sounds like
The United Federated States of America for a reason.

That repressed conservos have to analyze something like that out of a Sci Fi show because it treats even alien races as equals just shows how desperate they are to bleat their retardeX, I mean, regressive agenda.
It's a Sci Fi show, for cryin out loud.
reply
1 up
What episode was that?

My MSM lies app kept CGIing in some "Prime Directive" claptrap from the 1st episode to the last movie.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Keep on lickin Commie balls, trailer trash tardo
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
Well the only people licking commie balls are you libtarded Demo-rats. I don't lick anybody's balls like you do, but since you want to go there by bringing up "commie" Putin I will just play along for a bit

http://www.businessinsider.com/putin-steers-clear-of-communist-ceremony-steeped-in-russian-history-2017-11
reply
0 ups
Hey, the Putin f*ggot is still at it.

Lick that smeg away, because inbreeding needs protein too.
reply
6 ups, 4 replies
As an american im thankful that we cam have these discussions and express pur views freely without the fear of getting our heads chopped off in the name of Allah or burned at the steak in the name of Jesus, or put in gas chambers in the name of Communism.
reply
5 ups
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/1od4re.gif (click to show)
but forceful is correct about the "gas chambers" the National Socialist Workers Party or the fascists Nazis put people in gas chambers. It was the communists who starved millions to death and sent millions more to rot in gulags in Siberia and other places.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Truman dropped atomic bombs on Japan also.

Lets face the facts, all the rulers at the time were EVIL!
reply
1 up, 1 reply
What's so evil about dropping bombs on the enemy who bombed a sleeping nation to get us involved in it?

Shame of it is WE didn't nuclearitize ALL Japs and Germs into exticntion, you know, like they tried to do with everyone else?
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
The Democrats where THE conservative party until 1964. Just ask yer pa, ya ignorant nutsack.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
1
9
6
4

L
B
J

G-g-git it?

Yer backing what I'm sayin while pretending to argue, dimwit.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
FDR and Truman are known as some of our most liberal Presidents, especially FDR. Eisenhower was hardly a liberal himself. He was actually the last president to impose mass deportations of illegal aliens.

You lose again, snowflake.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Lmao, im going to hell for laughing at this meme haha
reply
1 up
I thought the same thing lol
reply
1 up
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 2 replies
People were put in gas chambers during a fascist regime not a communist one and by the will of a mad man.
reply
5 ups
reply
[deleted]
1 up
reply
[deleted]
4 ups, 3 replies
you ripped this from the "when i grow up i want to be a democrat" meme
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
On that I put better than getting anal from a republican
reply
4 ups
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
reply
1 up
({shhhhh, you weren't suppossed to tell})
reply
2 ups
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups
i.imgflip.com/1qb442.gif (click to show)
reply
2 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
Funny story, I've actually went back to some of my older memes and have found 20+ comments as a result of flame wars. ;P
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 2 replies
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Don't know if you've caught any of the MSM lies, but Commander Twitter Tears is, well, I don't wanna spoil the surprise.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Putin was high ranking KGB and Apparatchik, and he's playin
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
Nice try tho, brownshirt.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 4 replies
Which is why he imposed multiple sanctions on Russia, rankling the ire of your lord, Putin the Great, to collude with Trump to make him Prez in order to thwart Hillarat who applauded them.

Are you even vaguely aware of the world outside of your fave tin foil hatted YouTubers?
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
That's what the last sanctions he placed are for, you dilapidated moron.

I'm getting bored slapping yet another low brow trailer park hick around, it's kinda abusive for me to do so. So have a good fap off to your shirtless commie hero on the wall, aye?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Keep on rockin, ya pathetic fleeb.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
1 up
Of course, fleeb.

Thanks for playing, wuss.
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 2 replies
reply
1 up
Enjoy your New Years Eve with my p**is up your flaring rectum.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
If you take notice, I have not nor will I ever reply to jack_henoff again. I learned long ago that there is NO reasoning with this person.
He labels people "fascists" and "Russian sympathizers" and seems to support every talking point of the Left but disavows being a liberal/Democrat/leftist.
He doesn't affirm any of the positions of liberty.
I don't know what he thinks he is, maybe he is just a troll. I could respect that, but I don't feed the trolls. I just ignore him no matter what type of vile and bile he spews. Just ignore him because that will get under his skin. There are many others just like jack.
[deleted]
2 ups
I am done with him as well. You can't reason with these loons. I hope he is just trolling, but sadly I have noticed that loons like him really exist in the real world...and there are too many of them.
1 up
Well there is only so many times you can lamely try to deflect a question with your 3 standards:

1. John 3:16

2. RED HERRING FALLACY!

3. STRAW MAN FALLACY!

At least you finally learned your place and how to keep your blithering sphincter shut.
reply
[deleted]
2 ups
reply
[deleted]
1 up
reply
[deleted]
1 up
The last sanctions were also placed by trump you buttf**king moron!

F**k off you lying piece of shit! You have yet to prove that Russians were able to interfere in a way that changed the results of the election or that Keep kissing the butt of hillary and obama you stupid little snowflake demo-crap. f**k you and your family!
reply
1 up
i.imgflip.com/1p0i0z.gif (click to show)
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I doubt you are actually open to any new ideas. I doubt you understand what democratic socialism actually is. I doubt you understand what capitalism really is. If you did you would know that free markets and democratic socialism are compatible.

What you don't seem to understand is that any system that isn't working for the people is useless for those people. Capitalism has pumped the wallets of that fat politicians because they pay them for writing laws that make them money while screwing over the average person. It doesn't have to be that way. You just need to remove money from politics. The only person who was every serious about such a notion was the democratic socialist, Bernie Sanders. He was a socialist because that is what the people want. And the reason people want it is because it's been doing wonders all over the world for developed countries. This should all be fairly obvious, so I don't know what you are trying to accomplish here...

Perhaps propaganda?
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
Yep, there is no difference between socialism and democratic socialism. You've got me. I'm woke.
Flip Settings

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
"MOM, I WANT TO BE A SOCIALIST WHEN I GROW UP."; "WHICH IS IT SON? YOU CAN'T DO BOTH."
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back
Feedback