What is so bad about socialism anyways?

Post Reply New Topic

No they don't. The UK has an open door to most nations in the EU - and Polish, Lithuanians and Hungarians continue to wend their merry way in. We have an open-door policy still.

Indeed. The sin taxes in some countries make the price of these goods obscene. Fancy paying nearly $20 for a glass of beer as in Norway?

Don't let the fact that we have an NHS make you think we are socialist. Margaret Thatcher and then Tony Blair put an end to socialism in the UK. I would say our capitalist economy is completely unrestrained, perhaps more so than the US.

I don't see why we need to make a choice between socialism and capitalism. I think the two could easily exist side by side in a country. Socialism just means that the primary industries are not privately owned but run by the state. I think there is no reason why that cannot be applied while at the same time allowing all secondary and tertiary industries to be privatey run.

I have always had a distaste for allowing our railways, and utilities run by the private sector. The initial work that went into those industries happened in the 19th century, to hand them over to private firms nowadays is like giving away our heritage. And there is no evidence that these industries are more efficient or better value than before. And the idea of competition in such industries is a fantasy.

Also it is bizarre that currently we have the situation where some of our banks are owned by the taxpayer! That should make any capitalist uneasy.

I'm sorry to spam this but..

define socialism - someone - in a way that doesn't make you sound like a moron.

becuase it's always these sort of..erm.."liberals" who like Norway for it's quality of life that say something like.. "Sweden is socialist" or other such.

OR you get these borderline BNP members who are afraid their precious culture is being destroyed by sand people, and it's those "socialised" policies that are lettin it happen..

OK, in the likely event that none of you can define socialism as defined by the founders of socialism I'll go right ahead and say it:

socialism is workers control over the means of fraking production NO it's not "good healthcare" it is NOT "government spending" it's not even "they took our jobs!" policies.
Socialism is when you make decisions in the workplace democratically in a workers council sort of way. that's not "my" opinion, that's the opinion of Marx, Engels, Bakunin, Proudhon, Owen..and other such figures you've never heard of..

So, take Mondragon Corporation, they are this large firm in Spain that are completely managed by the workers and their pay is decided democratically - administrators are elected and their pay decided by all, that - ladies and germs - is social-frakin-ism. High taxes are not "socialist", taxes are the price you pay for living in a society that supports you.

So, do..be a dear and turn off you Bill O'rly and actually ask a proper socialist what socialism is.

Oh and here's a grand revelation that members of the socialist movement discovered around 1936 or so: if a self proclaimed socialist nation denies workers - you know, the people socialism is all about - basic rights and democracy in the workplace, then it's not really socialism is it?

This is fickle point but "socialism" has a second meaning in Leninism where it's sort of twisted and bastardised and I don't buy into it one bit.

See my post is made just for you. or does the anti state wing of socialism just..er, not exist?

Well, it's far more expensive than the UK/Ireland and has an extensive, extensive social system.

More corporatist than free-market capitalist.

An excellent post M_P, My version of socialism stems from Marxism and trotskyism, and is one where the state is dominated by the truly democratic will of the people, so to the the question asked by the OP there is in my opinion very little wrong with socialism, sure some will not be happy with the decisions of the majority but surely this is far better than the present system which is now barely paying lipservice to the notion of democracy. Unfortunately the Terms socialism and communism have been bastardised, so much so that a country like north Korea which is in truth a fascist state can be portrayed by the media as "communist". The same goes for Stalinist regimes who really have as much to do with socialism as a monarchy has to do with democracy.

To describe a socially advanced regime such as the UK shortly after WW2 as socialist is to be ignorant of the fact that the regime was built upon and around capitalism, which is why in contemporary times of economic woe all the social gains made during the post war period have been removed.

There's nothing wrong with socialism, total disarmament and world peace, free healthcare, Santa Clause, or the Easter Bunny just as long as you realize they are all fairy tales and not real.

There was a time in america when lots of brilliant young minds got together and truly believed that there was a better way. So they moved to communes and started up their own socialist utopias. They believed their system would be better, and they would be happy and prosper. But they all collapsed because they could not use force, and people were free to leave.

Yep.

Communists realized that socialist utopia could not be achieved without force. The end goal of communism is a classless and stateless society, and what we have seen through history as communism is only the means to that end. But as we have seen, they have also failed to reach their fairy tale utopia.

Communists realized the problem. The only way for the a socialist utopia to exists is if everyone agrees to it. So the only way to reach it is to kill anyone who disagrees with the socialist utopia. And thus the ultimate paradox is that every single person has a different view of what that utopia should be, but it can not exist unless we all agree. So the only way to achieve your utopia is to kill every single human being except for yourself. That is why it is simply just a fairy tale.

Is there any sort of government that can exist without force? If not, then how is socialism any worse than other forms of government?

Why not? and speaking of freedom I would argue we are not all that free in the U.S with our capitalist system, after all the media has a lot of say over how we act, what we do, what we like ect. I don't pay it much mind but the majority of people seem to.

Scandinavian countries, a lot of E.U countries and even Canada, I think they are all good examples. I do not expect the U.S to ever become a copy of any of those, but I think a lot of that could be applied.

I think I know what socialism means.....I was not trying to define it on exact technical dictionary terms, I was just explaining the aspects of it I like.

Yes I like their healthcare system, at least what I have heard about it.

Well as someone who does not dislike the idea of socialism, I can certianly say that is not the sort of socialism I would support....and that seems to describe our capitalist system as well honest hard working people pay to support a few millionares and billionares who want more.

I do not support the idea of the majority doing all the work for the few wether it's a capitalist system or socialist system.