Socialism Does NOT Work | Daniel We Are Not All Feminists | Edwina Currie | Oxford 2 days ago   13:19

Share
OxfordUnion
Daniel Hannan gives his argument that Socialism does not work.
SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► http://is.gd/OxfordUnion

Daniel Hannan opens with a quote from a from a previous socialist known as Adolf Hitler. The socialist voters elevated cohersion over freedom. The human nature of dog eat dog and ambition to do well was harnessed by capitalism to a socially useful end. He highlights that there are no socialist countries in the wolrd today (e.g. Cuba, Zimbabwe etc) that have persormed better than capitalist one. He concludes his rousing speech with by saying socialism does not work and the house must vote for freedom.

Filmed on Thursday 28th November 2013
MOTION: This House Believes Socialism Will Not Work.
RESULT: Motion Defeated

STAY CONNECTED:
Facebook @ http://fb.me/theoxfordunion
Twitter @ http://www.twitter.com/OxfordUnion
Oxford Union Website @ http://www.oxford-union.org/

ABOUT DANIEL HANNAN:
Daniel John Hannan is a British journalist, author and politician who is a Member of the European Parliament, representing South East England for the Conservative Party. He is also the Secretary-General of the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists (AECR). An advocate of localism and a Eurosceptic, Hannan earned worldwide fame for making a speech in the European Parliament criticising Gordon Brown.

ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY:
The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 190 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.

Rights managed by Oxford Media Associates http://www.oxfordmediaassociates.com/

Filmed by Oxford Media Solutions http://www.oxfordmediasolutions.co.uk
MailFootballSoccer

Comments 4409 Comments

Mike Mercer
Amazing and so true.
Gena Clarke
Well look at South Africa. The ANC is implementing the NHI Bill, which will take away Health Insurance. The Health Insurances will only be allowed to offer services that the government can't. This is to make it "fair" for South Africans who can't afford Health Insurance. Well, it means that private hospitals will fall and become government hospitals, which in turn will become just as defunct as Livingston or Dora Nginza. I would rather take my chances with Dr Kervorkian than go to Livingston or Dora Nginza. But this is a socialist communist government. And before anyone asks why communist, I would say, go read the ANC handbook. Their Allies were communist countries to begin with. Cuba, Russia, China to name a few. All commies at the time. They were taught propaganda by the Russian communists of the time. Look at how the youth has gone through a de-education program called school, where they have got to the point of burning down universities for "Free Education". Socialism does not work. It makes people lazy, it tells people that they don't have to work hard for anything, because the government will give it; and in South Africa we have women who poison themselves while pregnant, in order to have deformed babies who can give them a bigger welfare check. Don't believe me? Investigate the government hospitals and look at the findings in the Path Labs, when placentas are checked after birth, for abnormalities. Your answers are there.
To Serve Man
Doesn't work at what?


Achieving utopia?


NOTHING DOES! ...Especially democracy /capitalism (which is simply middle class vested interests and INSTINCTIVE VIRTUE SINGLING to the king /god priest/ zeitgeist).


But socialism works quite well at VOTE BUYING and thus getting enough power to *impose on one's enemies.*


And democracy / capitalism knows this...


democracy-ites /capitalists (i.e instinctive middle class) don't want the "targeted enemies" (lib elites) of this zeitgeist to be imposed on. Simple actually. Capitalist and democracy-ites (i.e instinctive middle class) are quite content to use socialism to buy votes over in democracy's occupied -- er um "liberated" -- colonies so demos / capi will have enough power, thru that trick, to impose on its enemies there. So obviously the anglo-sphere knows that "socialism works".


It is democracy and capitalism that "doesn't work." It doesn't create its advertised utopia (freedom from state for the "people"), it doesn't stop liberalism, it doesn't stop feminism, and it doesn't stop immigration. It doesn't even want to.


Where demos and capi works is it is keeping the treasonous -- king murdering -- class of instinctive middle class virtue signaling liars in piles of the dead kings' wealth at the expense of the people it is ostensibly supposed to be leading to a utopia.
Joe Mitchell
Socialism works for the rich. They just like the poor to live under grinding capitalism.
NLTops
Pure socialism doesn't work. It makes all men lazy. If everyone gets their share regardless of what they do, there is no impetus to carry their share. Pure capitalism doesn't work either. It is the epitome of (natural) selfishness and always consists of the exploited and the exploiters. The only right answer is a healthy mix of both. Capitalism restricted by socialism. Socialism restricted by capitalism. Able to improve your prosperity whilst restricted from doing harm to others (be it employees or consumers) to achieve it.
Selfishness and empathy must be in balance. Evil is when either is abandoned for the sake of the other.
MCES LEX
Socialism doesn't work? no one throws their kids out on the streets after they turn 18, parents support them till they're in their mid 20's or until they can find a job with that useless art degree🤣🤣🤣socialism is written in the Bible it is the way.
Tony Stark
He has proven nothing , He dodged a legit question. Capitalism keeps the rich rich and the poor poor. I can’t even go to fucking college cause I can’t afford it.
Larry Long
Thank God for Daniel Hannan. At least he is open minded enough to know that repeating the idea of making America a Socialist Republic is one of the most IGNORANT ideas on Earth but, Try to tell The Democrats that! Why don't the Morons do their history? Because we have a new generation of ignorant lazy morons that (1). Do not want to work. (2). that want to smoke pot all day. (3). That refuse to believe in a creator and also they don't believe the creation that is before your very eyes like The Trees, The Water, The Sky, The Stars and the most obvious is, Have you ever wondered how you got here? If you haven't read your Bible your not a very wise person. Have you ever asked yourself why your so scared to read it? Because deep down inside you already know Christ came and died for your Sins and that you are a Sinner and you need to Repent. By the way, "Wherefore God Also Hath Higly Exalted Him, And Given Him A Name Which Is Above Every Name: That At The Name Of Jesus Every Knee Should Bow." (Philippians 2:10). Amen. P.S. Bow now or, Bow later but, Every Knee Will Bow. Trust Me!
Unklebillybob
He is absolutely Correct: "Socialism is less Free" And "Socialism takes away Human Dignity and Civil Rights." Plus, as Margret Thatcher said, "The Problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other People's money!"
anti stuff
I posit that Hannan like most of these guys never actually read Marx. Kind of, obvious to say the least. Marx made a few predictions, a few didn't happen. The vast majority are spot on and have come true. Hannan is a typical free-market charlatan
anti stuff
This Hanna guy is all over the place and tossing out the usual myths that have been rebuked over 100 years ago. This guy goes right into the debunked Libertarian "human nature" argument, but made no argument, just quick reference to the words "human nature"! Hilarious! Then he screws up and made a red herring and another false equivocation fallacy with the "human nature" retort right after that but unbeknown to him, he is actually making things even worse for him because of it! UNBELIEVABLE!! He said: "The desire for material improvement" is human nature, lol, then "doesn't matter what regime" but see, for his ilk, Libertarians, etc., that the usual and very popular sloppy argument is "Socialism can't work because, human nature", which goes against his little deal of suggesting that "desire for material improvement" is also human nature.  Well guys, if Socialism can't work cuz human nature, which for them means all humans are greedy and lazy, which would mean there is no desire for material improvement, then not even Capitalism can work because, muh human nature, oh, but see, "Capitalism" is magic human nature because only that "desire for material improvement" only exists in Capitalism (even though he said it exists in all societies, lol). It's only in Socialism does the very same human nature become greedy and lazy and no desire for material improvement, LOL. ONLY the rich, that are ordained by God and a full working class enslaved to them, is only when his nutter "human nature" is a thing.  Fucking shit nutter is all over the place and doesn't make a coherent argument.   The reality: There is no human nature. None. There is only Culture and the relation to the productive means. Also, his statement on Marx is incorrect as well. Daniel Hannan is a massive hack.
Al Jaume
There is something I dont agree with: to say that Cuba is an example of fail socialism simply because it is poor. Cuba is poor because it has had an economic embargo since the missile crisis. USA didn't allowed its developed via trade with other nations due to its policies from the cold war.

If you see similar nations with embargoes, such as Iran and north korea you can see the picture regarding economic development is similar. The difference is that those nations have neighbours that facilitate informal.trade (e.g. black market in N. Korea by smuggling Chinese products). Cuba is just a few miles from USA. And trading partners are simply too far away (except Venezuela).

My comments are not about the government regime of these nations, but about the double standard applied to cuba when used as an example of failed socialism. I reckon that without a commercial embargo cuba would be similar to a Scandinavian nation nowadays.
anti stuff
In the opening there, Hannan is skirting the question and went right into his "Socialism can't work cuz coercion" so, according to him, that's why the Nazis slaughtered Leftists. I'm not sure which is more appalling, his watering down (and seeming defense of the Nazis) or the outright fallacy he rolls out upon his dodging of the statement. What we need to first establish is what the Nazis were. The Nazis were in effect, Evangelical Christian Conservatives that defended the property rights of Capitalists under a racist ideological base. They considered Socialism and communism as a Jewish Conspiracy and that by the Nazis defending private property rights (Capitalist rights) was doing Gods work. Same thing we are seeing again today. The reason why Leftists got slaughtered is exactly for that reason. To keep the working class in eternal economic serfdom so that they can create their Theocratic Elysium Aryan Utopia under Gods law.
anti stuff
Hannas entire sloppy argument (and it's very sloppy btw) is based upon his opinion that "Socialism's edict is not equality but coercion". Few problems here. The first thing to realize is that he makes a huge comparative fallacy here. "Socialism can't work because it's edict is coercion and not equality" but "Capitalism does work because there is no coercion" which on both counts is ridiculously absurd. The Capitalist mode of production is based upon pure coercion. For producers, ie: workers, the daily existence of being a wage slave is conducted on a coercive relationship in which you face one of two choices. Either take the petty remuneration from the exploiter or starve. There is nothing more than that "choice". Which is promoted and enforced by way of the Capitalist State.  An entire class of people exploited by Capital, by way of violent coercion. The Capitalist State even takes it's guns to it's own people so that they remain passive wage slaves and that the owning, monied class preserves it's privileged position.  It's not a clever thing that those liars and deceivers like Hannan always leave out the reality of things as they stand and just make up whatever, as they go. As you see, it's very easy to knock down their "arguments".  More coming.
lastchip
its always amazing to hear the gasps and pee hit the floor, when todays socialist/fascist are reminded of the fact that nazism is just another name for their beliefs
John Rutherford
That chap compared the delight when you listen to Beethoven as the same delight as when you have a large bank balance. What a twerp. Anyone can listen to Beethoven and that's socialism. Only a few will ever have a large bank account that's capitalism.
harbster2
How can anyone argue that socialism works? - it obviously doesn't !
Robert Brandywine
Yanis Varoufakis made me realize that Capitalism died long ago. It was killed by the Capitalist elite themselves in order to address the issues raised by Socialists. We live in mixed-economies today.
Iron Sights
Historically, Fascism is a system of governance that is implemented for the purpose of enforcing communism and socialism which are social orders that determine the equitable distribution of resources for a population.
Fascism is a nationalistic authoritarian system of governance. This includes nationalization and Distribution of marketable resources, such as energy and healthcare.
Modern political rhetoric commonly infers a right or left difference between fascism and socialism and or communism, however in practice fascism is what is used to enforce socialism and communism. The arguments for either are mostly semantics, as an authoritarian system is necessitated to provide a motivation to sustain these orders, which are purposefully designed to economically subjugate a working population.
The greatest difference between a purely fascist system and a socialist system may be how private equity is awarded or determined by merit. Private ownership of residence may be achieved and for some outside the governing establishment a greater level of prosperity may also be achieved from individual production if permitted by the state. However the state reserves the right to seize or purpose production if it is required to serve the nation.
Communism insist all production is only purposed to serve the collective.
Though definitions insist there is no private equity retained or distributed with communism, there is always a wealthier ruling class, as every order requires a sorted political class to determine the measures of distributions. Entitling selected individuals to enrich themselves from the production of their subjugates or the collective. A collective is of course just another word for nation.


No matter how anyone tries to spin it. There is very little difference between these systems of governance. All are a means of authoritarian economic subjugation. Slave labor states for the ruling classes. For which there are ranks. Entertainers and propagandist exist as extensions of the ruling class of every system. Ranking above educators, police and resource administrators.
America First
The biggest proponents of socialism live and are thriving in capitalist countries. The students reactions to Hitler being a socialist should say a lot about the cognitive dissonance and Marxism that is going on. Anyone hear of MK Ultra?
Add Reply

We Are Not All Feminists | Edwina Currie | Oxford Socialism Does NOT Work | Daniel 2 days ago   17:24

Share
Edwina Currie opposes the motion that we are all feminists.
SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► http://is.gd/OxfordUnion
Facebook @ http://fb.me/theoxfordunion
Twitter @ http://www.twitter.com/OxfordUnion
Oxford Union Website @ http://www.oxford-union.org/

Edwina Currie begins by honoring Camila Batmanghelidh for the work that she does with children, following this she talks about the days when she was at Oxford and the ridiculous rules that were imposed saying that only boy was allowing in a girl room overnight as long as she paid for extra linin. Two boys were only allowing in the room at one time meaning that when her family came to visit her boyfriend had to stand outside whilst her father and brother were in the room.
She says she disagrees with feminism on two counts both cultural and practical. On the cultural side there is a part of feminism that hates men and this is disagreeable in Edwina's opinion. Also there is the theory that women should be equal to men in every way shape and form, which denigrates and diminishes the life experience and history of most women. Feminists often take the view that women who make other choices away from their own ideals of feminism are making the wrong choices. The choice between home and career is the one that comes up the most and she says her mother's generation chose home whereas her daughter's generation choose career. As a mother herself she says that the most wonderful thing a woman can do is hold her own baby in her arms.
On the practical side she says that Feminism makes victims of women always suggesting that men are constantly beating them down. When special measures are in place to promote women in the workplace quite often this sets women up to fail as the pressure on men to do this often leads to the promotion of people who are simply not good enough. The UK has had one woman Prime Minister who was not a feminist as she made her way through the system not once complaining that men hold her back and when Margaret Thatcher saw an opportunity to go into leadership she took it. The labour party had 81 female MP's and when the opportunity came to lead the party only one woman, Diane Abbott, stepped forward. Edwina conclude by saying that to all the women that you need the education, skills, single-mindedness and most of all courage to achieve what you want.
Filmed on Thursday 14th February 2013
MOTION: THIS HOUSE BELIEVE THAT WE ARE ALL FEMINISTS

ABOUT EDWINA CURRIE:
Former Conservative MP & Junior Minister; broadcaster & novelist.

ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY:
The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 189 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.

Rights managed by Oxford Media Associates http://www.oxfordmediaassociates.com/

Filmed by Oxford Media Solutions http://www.oxfordmediasolutions.co.uk

Related Videos