I think I'm beginning to see the mental splinter in Fred's mind.  His description of socialism more resembles the Universalist Church, only without the Christian concept of God and the Creator.  The basic principles are there, only their application is guided by some who claim to be unbiased and educated while the common folk need to be led.  This is the collectivist aspect.  This is not freedom.

While a person should do good, compelling them to do what others say is good is ripe for corruption.  The rulers benefit tremendously when the people are convinced that they must obey the dictates of the do-gooders rather than decide for themselves what cause to donate time and money to.  

All that mankind needs to do to 'save' ourselves is to take responsibility and remember who we really are.

Hmm, they were all killed by their wives, but rather should have been put on trial and executed via tribunal instead?  Wow that's a new take.

That's what Liberty is all about — living life to the fullest without hindrance from others imposing their rules on society, laying claim to what is not theirs, pushing the answers to 'why am I here?'   I can see that Fred's version of socialism is great for him, it's just that the rest of us would like to live our own lives.

Bizarre.  They deserved to be put on trial?  Sheesh.

Love it!  Right on the button.

What a difference 70 years has made at Yale ...

My goodness, how far Massachusetts has fallen...

"Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me."

Are children still taught that any more?  How about college kids?

Trusting and respecting the Laws of Nature is republicanism.  Democracy is essentially mob rule.  Socialism is a theocracy.  Socialism cannot be implemented without force — i.e. violence.  Whatever happened to 'live and let live?'  

I think your posts ARE relevant to "if you can keep it."  An unarmed citizenry CANNOT keep it!  ;-)  Thanks, Jim.

Excellent video, Logan.  Collectivism vs Individualism equates to a Democracy vs Republic and Socialist vs Libertarian.  This is the quintessential distinction to understand.  Now, that would be 'progress.'

Change the word 'Education' to 'Truth' — there fixed it for you.

Great.  Now do climate change.

"It would be the very pleasant to meet productively and positively with an intelligent individual." 

So much for that, eh?  Your arrogance and narcissism are getting in the way.

Ad hominem.  I responded clearly to your posts, Fred.  You are just name-calling.

There it is — the Socialist wants to control you.  All talk of love and understanding out the window.  Your way or no way.  That is indeed socialism.  There are no rights under socialism, only privileges.

Fred, you miss the essence of the difference between your definition of socialism and actual socialism.  Real socialism has lofty utopian ideals, but all under its thumb MUST obey the leaders in the WAY they implement their goals for society.  There is no freedom and thus no personal responsibility.  A free people must indeed love one another, be directed by goodness, have an aversion to lies, theft and murder, and work together to defend the never-ending assaut on their natural born rights — yes, rights.  Even uneducated children have rights — they do not need to earn them.  

As far as I can tell, Fred, your definition of socialism is an appropriation of the Christian 'way' except that the people are not free but are always under the regulation of someone like, well, you, Fred, as you have stated that the common people are children and need your guidance.  The secular version of this is essentially fascism which has as its focus the purity of the people in service to the whole (the State).

Let me help you out, Fred.  What you are defining as socialism is a form of collectivism which is in direct opposition to a republican form of government chartered by a free people.

Like so many liberals, you have the right idea, just the wrong 'way' to implement it.  The ends do not justify the means.

I think you may be inclined towards classic liberalism — just don't call it socialism.  Stick with Liberty and personal Responsibility, and you can be as loving and helpful as you can be, and you will find a lot of support and like-minded folks.  And instead of looking down on we common people, you might find we aren't all as 'primitive' as you think.  ;-)

Why does the average American not know this?

"The Socialist believes individuals in control of themselves and the governing force that promotes this course" — sounds more like individualism.  Does a socialist individual control himself, or does he/she control "themselves" as a group? 

Fred, you do not explain the 'how' of socialism — you explain in general terms that can be applied to libertarians, for example.  The difference between socialism and individualism is that socialists act as a group, where the majority dictates to the minority; whereas individualism places the rights of the individual above the desires of the group — the individual does not have to obey the group. 

The individual has rights he/she is born with — rights are not granted by the group.  What does socialism say about that? What is the "governing force" of Socialism, Fred?

Governments, and rulers of all stripes, need obedient citizens and spend years teaching them "their place."  Ignorant are they that do not seek the truth hidden from them — this is by design.  Schools are the battleground for the minds of the people.  The rich and powerful design the programs to promote their power at the expense of the common people.  The people are taught that they must follow the dictates of the ruling class — true individuality is prohibited.  Ignorant Americans do not know who they are, the power and responsibility they have, the gift of Freedom never before achieved in hundreds of years now being ignored.

How many cover-ups are holding the people hostage?  How many cures have been buried by the medical establishment?  How many usurpations by government?  How many murders and assassinations covered up?  How many elections stolen?  How many lies are being taught in school books?  How many politicians are corrupt?  How many newspapers and TV stations are owned by the ruling classes, and what is their agenda?

The most striking example is the lie of Climate Change.  Without ignorance and constant propaganda, the lie could never stand.  This is being pushed on all the nations by the rulers of the world to subjugate them and to depopulate them.  Power grabs continue in order to fight this phantom, and the Western world is only too happy to play along as people like Al Gore become rich on carbon credits and fluorescent light bulbs.  Now we are seeing the world get squeezed over oil — you can't have any!

Who likes ignorant individuals? Other ignorant individuals, because the price they have paid for the lie is too high — like a losing gambler who keeps doubling down, facing reality is too tough.  A false religion is unfulfilling and disempowering, and that is what the people are fed everyday ... hard.

But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

Prove it.  Trump lost money.  Unlike Obama who became enormously rich from his donors — 2 oceanfront houses in Hawaii and Nantucket worth over $25 million.  The Hawaii property was a gift from a grateful Democrat.

Why?  Because that's the way the rulers like it.  The republic has long since been supplanted with a statist theocracy that appropriates the power of the People with a flick of the pen.  Making the world "safe for democracy" has been the impetus, and voting for the money in the opposition's pocket has become the de facto purpose of 'democracy.'

If you believe in Climate Change, you are ignorant and superstitious.

If you believe in BLM and LGBTQI+, you are ignorant and superstitious.

If you believe white supremacy is the biggest threat to the country, you are ignorant and superstitious.

If you think inflation is NOT caused by government printing trillions in currency, you are ignorant and superstitious.

If you think capitalism is evil and socialism is good, you are ignorant and superstitious.

If you think gender is a concept, use weird pronouns, and cannot admit that sex is biological, you are ignorant and superstitious.

Good question: why?!

No doubt.  Your arrogance is sure to meet with much resistance.  It is the choice between free will and servitude.

"The Socialist says no more playing, the time for constructive labor has arrived."  You are certainly right about that, the socialist claims authority over people and dictates what they may do, what is deemed 'constructive' for the state, no more 'playing around' making your own decisions about what is constructive or not. 

I'm torn as to what this sounds most like, fascism under Hitler or communism under Stalin and Mao (or Xi, Castro, Maduro, Kim, Trudeau, etc.).

If you want people to grow up and take responsibility, the nanny-state is no way to go.  Socialism is a bunch of folks claiming to be the 'adults' (like Fred) in whom the rest of us 'children' are to be under their guidance perpetually.  The nanny-state does not let people grow up, it conditions people to be dependent, so the man with the slop bucket gets voted as swine herder every time.  Socialism is the appropriation of the very spirit of humankind.