Both Soviet-style communism (which is what “idealistic” socialism inevitably devolves into) and fascism, when applied to real societies and allowed to fester, have a lot in common.
The uk doesn’t generally provide housing. It does provide a monetary allowance for those that don’t have a primary residence near Westminster. Places like downing st are for the convenience of the state, not the politician, like the White House. The royals, on the other hand…
This is very different. This is people getting given government housing because they are feeling unwelcome in the community. It’s hypocritical and, as the article points out, it’s pushing out the people this housing was designed to accomodate.
Of course it’s not really socialism, as it’s not for everyone. The point is the state is proving their wants (not needs) while they deny the needs of others.
Isn’t that socialism? Government housing for me, but not for thee is pretty typical, but it’s also good they don’t feel welcome when spreading hate.
I would think this is fascism. When elected officials are housed in military quarters.
Not an expert at all though. Fascism loves to take over the military though.
Both Soviet-style communism (which is what “idealistic” socialism inevitably devolves into) and fascism, when applied to real societies and allowed to fester, have a lot in common.
Only if you think socialism is when the government does things
No, when it provides all your needs.
That’s doing things, governments do that under every system. You won’t believe the houses the UK pays for its leader caste.
Socialism is the workers owning the means of production. This is a corrupt government doing corrupt things so chickenshit cowards can feel important.
The uk doesn’t generally provide housing. It does provide a monetary allowance for those that don’t have a primary residence near Westminster. Places like downing st are for the convenience of the state, not the politician, like the White House. The royals, on the other hand…
This is very different. This is people getting given government housing because they are feeling unwelcome in the community. It’s hypocritical and, as the article points out, it’s pushing out the people this housing was designed to accomodate.
Of course it’s not really socialism, as it’s not for everyone. The point is the state is proving their wants (not needs) while they deny the needs of others.