WDSmart

You described authoritarianism right there. Any infringement on self ownership is authoritarian. The US constitution requires that the government is run by the people for the people. But that really annoys the left because they want to call all the shots for you and dictate who gets what, entitled rewards without merit. I'm not sure what you mean by "self ownership" or why you think socialism does not support that. I assume you think "to each according to needs" means the government would determine what your needs are (and are not). That part is true, but whether or not that's "authoritarian" depends on the type of government. If the government were a democracy, then everyone would vote on what your needs were . If the government was a representative democracy, then the elected representatives would together determine on what your needs were, or the elected officials in your area would determine that. If the government were an authoritarian type, like a monarchy, then the monarch or his appointed representatives would determine that. That's exactly how it is done today in the USA (my home country), which is, for the most part, a representative democratic republic.

I disagree with AOC on this, which I seldom do. Greene's nomination/appointment is not "hilarious.' It's, as are all Trump's cabinet nominations/appointments, "outrageous" and will be catastrophic for my home country during the next four years. But that's what the plurality of the voters apparently wanted, or at least were conned into believing would be the best route for them. 😞

Bondi is certainly a step up from Gaetz, but as with all Trump's nominations, she will cause chaos in the upcoming government. 😞

Why do you think it is "impossible" to have socialism without authoritarianism? Socialism is "from each according to ability, and to each according to need." What part of that do you think requires an authoritarian government? A historical example is Native American Indian tribes. Although they had a Chief, he did not instruct them in their everyday life. They could go hunt or fish individually, whatever and whenever they liked. They could also agree to go together to accomplish some tasks for the entire tribe. Logic tells us that economies and governments are separate entities. They have to work together to serve the society, but none have a one-to-one relationship. If you think one does, I'd say you should consider capitalism paired with a plutocracy (rule of the wealthy). My education (BA, BS-CSE, and MBA) did not teach me there was a one-to-one link between socialism and authoritarianism. I do concede that I've heard that is taught today in some places, but that's more of an indoctrination than an education. Most government-provided services labeled "Public" are examples of socialism. These services are provided to ALL citizens and paid for by the government. A good example is a public park or a public street. Everyone can go, and no one has to pay a fee. That's "to each according to need." The park is maintained by the government using funds that have been collected through taxes. Some citizens don't pay taxes, some pay only a little taxes, and some pay a lot. That's "from each according to ability.'

Yes, women do clean men's restrooms in Thailand where I live. Sometimes a man does, but most times, a woman. I don't think the male cleaners are allowed in women's restrooms, though, but I don't know that for sure. And, in Thailand, there are 'ladyboys' (gay men who sometimes dress as women). I wonder which restrooms they go to. I've seen them occasionally in men's restrooms, but not very often. Maybe they usually go to women's restrooms? But, when I lived in the USA, sometimes at big events, like rock concerts or baseball/football games, women would go into men's restrooms during a break or halftime because the line to the women's restrooms was so long. When that happened, no one (men) really cared at all. Some were amused, but no one objected.

Yes, I agree with most of what you say above about the two extremes you describe above, but where do you draw the line? I think the line should be drawn in the same place for everyone, not just for transsexuals. For example, I would not want to see a woman coming into a men's restroom, taking off her underware, and lying on the floor with her legs spread. That presents a danger to men and boys.

The scary thing for me is that you and perhaps even the majority of my fellow citizens (USA) believe both socialism and communism have to be paired with authoritarianism. Socialism, communism, and capitalism are economic systems. Democracy, authoritarianism, monarchy, etc., are governmental systems. Economic systems can be paired with a variety (but not all) of governmental systems. Socialism, communism, and capitalism can all be paired with a democracy. Socialism and communism cannot be paired with a plutocracy like capitalism because, in socialism and communism, there are no people who have more wealth than others. The USA, like most countries, has a mixed economy with both socialistic and capitalistic aspects. Most services that start with "pubic" are socialistic services, like public libraries, public schools, public parks, public fire departments, etc. Services that start with "private" are capitalistic, like private hospitals, private schools, etc. The main arguments about the economy in the USA are not about whether or not there should only be capitalism or socialism; it's about the percentage of the mix. I hope you have learned something from the ooze above... 😉

I am a Democrat, a far-left liberal, and yes, I am a socialist. Socialism is an economic system like capitalism. A democratic government can administer a socialistic, capitalistic, or even communistic economy. A democratic government can indeed run a socialistic economy with a constitution, and yes, it has freedoms. It has, for example, the freedom for you to work at whatever you want, whatever you think will most benefit society. The good thing about socialism is that the government then fulfills your needs as best it can, using all the assets of society. In a capitalistic economy with a democratic government, needs are fulfilled by the individuals as best as they can, with no help at all from the government. If you are not a successful worker or entrepreneur, you'll starve.

MSNBC is history. RIP Oops! I take that back! I never watch MSNBC or Morning Joe, but I just looked them up on the Internet, and they are considered a liberal news outlet, not a conservative one. So, I hope Morning Joe gets his viewers back, and MSNBC continues to present the news from the perspective I prefer.

No, I do care about the USA's constitution, but some of the aspects of it are outdated. One is the topic of this Forum, and I've suggested another one, the Electoral College. It was put into place 248 years ago because after the votes in each state were collected and counted, they would have to ride on horseback to Washington, DC, to include them in the tally to determine who won the presidential election. Also, because of the emphasis on state's rights, each state was allowed to determine how their votes would be cast. Now, with our computers and communications structures, we should just be able to send the votes electronically and have them tallied as the popular vote. That's what I'd recommend. Of course, I'm a Democrat (favoring a democracy) and not a Republican (favoring a republic). If you're worried that I'm trying to change the results of this election, I'm not. I accept the fact that Trump won (accept it disappointedly). He won the plurality of the popular vote, so he would have been elected president in that case. However, there is the possibility that if no one wins a majority, the top two candidates will have a run-off election. That would have been an interesting event should it have happened this time.

Who knows. I'm not riven by hate so I can't guess their motives. I guess it's a religious thing. I just wonder because I don't care if my toilet facilities are used by other men, women, or transvestites of either gender unless, of course, they assault me. But that would apply to anyone at any time, not just transvestites.

Why? Do transvestites arouse them in ways they don't want to occur in public?

I never thought there would be anything I would agree with RFK, Jr. about, but I guess I was wrong!

Love it! It's about time...

Good! I hope he loses his show permanently.

These are just the beginning signs of what will be destructive and catastrophic four years.

Where, then, would transvestites go when they have to go to the toilet? There is now one that will be in the House of Representatives.

How about men's restrooms? Are women also not allowed in them?

I include the Electoral College in the list of historical but outdated aspects of our (the USA's) constitution.

Lock them up!

Lock him up!

Yes! I recently was skipping through the channels on my TV and saw Trump and Musk sitting in the front row in a UFC match! 😄

It would increase the cost of exporting those goods to the USA. That would reduce the profits of making and exporting those goods. That would either cause the goods to be sold at a lower price or lower the demand for the goods. Either of those would affect the economy of the country and would probably result in a reduction in the workforce of that industry. I am not an economist, so all this is just my thinking and resulting opinions on this subject.

Trump's suggested tariffs would hurt not only US consumers but also citizens in the country where the tariffs were imposed.

The Democrats (including me) don't have a "Death Wish"; we have a "Life Wish." Harris didn't do so badly. She did get about 48% of the popular vote in this election. Trump lost the last election but was still nominated by the Republican Party this time - and won. Why wouldn't Harris still be considered? I, however, would prefer someone like Pete Buttigieg, even though I know the majority of my fellow USA citizens are not ready for someone like him...yet. But after four years of Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress, they might be willing to vote for any Democrat nominated.