What is so bad about socialism anyways?

Post Reply New Topic

I think the religious right is the staunchest opponent to socialism because they declare it as unbiblical.

What is your personal experience with Socialism?

Have you ever lived in a Socialist country?

Do you even understand what Socialism really is?

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.

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?

In ancient Israel a ten percent tithe tax was imposed that went to the Levitical priesthood. This priesthood was in charge of all medical care. So if your dog got sick you would call the priest and he would give the dog free medicine.

What is your personal experience with Socialism?

Have you ever lived in a Socialist country?

Do you even understand what Socialism really is?

Socialism is common or social ownership of the means of production. In short, no private firms. Personal property is permitted and common, but capital property (such as roads and factories) are collectively owned, managed and operated.

But there is a down side. Soon or later (probably sooner}, a dominant managerial class will arise and the system will be run by and for the benefit of the few to the detriment of the many. To use the phrase of George Orwell the novelist some people will become more equal than others. This is nothing but human nature asserting itself. Socialism, however well intentioned cannot be reconciled with the natural selfishness and egotism of ordinary human beings. Socialism only works for a society of saints or angels.

ruveyn

Well yes that is why I pointed out....such a system can be abused, so there would have to be a way to prevent that sort of abuse.

Socialism is common or social ownership of the means of production. In short, no private firms. Personal property is permitted and common, but capital property (such as roads and factories) are collectively owned, managed and operated.

But there is a down side. Soon or later (probably sooner}, a dominant managerial class will arise and the system will be run by and for the benefit of the few to the detriment of the many. To use the phrase of George Orwell the novelist some people will become more equal than others. This is nothing but human nature asserting itself. Socialism, however well intentioned cannot be reconciled with the natural selfishness and egotism of ordinary human beings. Socialism only works for a society of saints or angels.

ruveyn

Actually it is anarchism that sounds idealistic. We wouldn't need a Government to keep us rabid dogs on a leash if we were saints. Socialism is a really cynical sounding ideology.

Not can be, but will be. And there is no way of preventing it short of changing human nature. Which cannot happen in any reasonable length of time. Evolution operates over periods of tens of thousands of years or more. As long as humans are what they are, socialism is a guaranteed failure.

Humans are the smartest, baddest apes in The Primate House. Live with it.

ruveyn

Corruption is an inevitability. It's interesting how abusing specific systems becomes a science on it's own, our current system however is the best we've seen for combating corruption.

I think it goes beyond just human nature to the nature of life itself and evolutionary drive.

Without a government, what would keep the strong from eating the weak? Read Hobbes on this question. -Leviathan-.

ruveyn