Socialism: Good or Bad?

[Agema]

I don't know wether I even bother to answer or not. The United States of America IS NOT A FRIGGIN' SOCIALIST COUNTRY! CUBA IS! Socialism takes a single party state to actually be socialism.

The soviet union was socialist: communism is the utopia Marx described would be worked towards with socialism. Communism has never existed, it is only an idea, a theory, a utopia.

I don't know why you bother to answer either, because whilst you're making statements like "Socialism takes a single party state" you make it clear you don't really know what socialism is. It's a wide-ranging branch of political and economic ideas, of which single-party Communism, or Marxist theory, is merely one amongst many. Which you'd know, if you'd read the link kindly supplied in the OP.

 

[yzzlthtz]

The Nazis were socialists.

thats all I have to say.

Hmm, the Brits, the French, the Swiss, the Canadians are also socialist. Also, the Nazis were Christian, so, yeah, that's all I have to say about that.

 

[Spitfire175]

The UK is a socialist country, as is most of Europe, and to a small extent the USA. Are you thinking of the mix of communism and totalitarianism that the Russians employed? Because that's extreme upper left. Socialism is the middle ground.

Socialism is the tool to get to communism.
Not to confuse social democrats with (Marxist) socialists.
EDIT: read teh post I wrote to Aegma

 

[Akai Shizuku]

We already had this debate a while back, so I'm not going to get into it (I'm really sick of political flamebait threads). I'm just going to state my opinion that the stateless, classless democratic society which socialism ultimately leads to is the only way for things to be fair for everyone.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Libertarian socialism is less of a contradiction in terms than fascist socialism. They can argue that concentration of money and power by a small number of people and corporations is more hostile to individual freedom than public ownership. No more kings is worth fighting for but oligarchs are not a problem?

 

[Jacklin]

Don't read the wiki, I hate that website, it can be really bias.

I see a lot of bozo's lingering around so I'm not making a comment on the issue and will instead waste space and time for you to read this.

 

[Sibbo]

You would like an example of a socialist country that doesn't endorse those things? Hum, how about the good old US of A. We have been practicing socialist policies for years. The fact is, Capitalism doesn't hold together too long, we need a bit of socialism here and there. It is a good thing when you don't overdo it. Now, whether President Obama is going to overdo it is up for debate.

Oh and to the best of my knowledge, the Soviet Union was communistic. Which for the purposes of this thread can be viewed as an extreme version of socialism.

I don't know wether I even bother to answer or not. The United States of America IS NOT A FRIGGIN' SOCIALIST COUNTRY! CUBA IS! Socialism takes a single party state to actually be socialism.

The soviet union was socialist: communism is the utopia Marx described would be worked towards with socialism. Communism has never existed, it is only an idea, a theory, a utopia.

No financial or political idea can work perfectly in reality, pure capitalism doesn't work just as much as pure socialism doesn't work. The USA isn't a socialist country, but neither is it a capitalist country it is a hybrid of the two. If either of the two were to be fully implemented there would be problems with both systems.

For instance the non-regulation of the financial market allowed for the credit crunch.

 

[Spitfire175]

I don't know why you bother to answer either, because whilst you're making statements like "Socialism takes a single party state" you make it clear you don't really know what socialism is. It's a wide-ranging branch of political and economic ideas, of which single-party Communism, or Marxist theory, is merely one amongst many. Which you'd know, if you'd read the link kindly supplied in the OP.

If we are to say "socialism" and not define it like "market socialism" or "social democracy", we can only assume we are discussing the very first form of socialism. That's what I've been talking about the whole time.
I do very well know what socialism is and how it is practised in the modern world. Reading back my posts, the whole argumet started with national socialism vs. Soviet socialism comparison, in which case the marxist theory is the most relevan one, so there is a degree of misunderstanding here. Do you really think someone is stupid enough to bundle every possible form of socialism into one?

The reason I said "the US is not a socialist country" is I was still thinking about the very first debate I got into, which considered the marxist theory. I do very, very well know aspects of socialist policy have been absorbed by the capitalism based western societies.

So here the problem is that you started reading the conversation from the end, and didn't know that I wasn't referring to socialism in general. And a fuckup for my part to use inaccurate descriptions. Clear?

 

[CoziestPigeon]

I do not know alot of socialism, but I think that is the thing when no matter what job you have you get the same pay as someone else with a higher skilled job or vice versa. I think maybe if you take little bits from it some of it might work.

No, you need to research socialism more.

This. Also, for FUCKS sake, Obama is not even CLOSE to being socialist!

State owned factories, no civil rights, a compulsory army, all key points of Hitler's regime and socialism in practicality.

Get your facts right, please. all the points you stated were autonomous from socialism, they were part of Hitler's policy and his alone. you're getting fascism and left wing ideologies mixed up.

Ahem. Give me one socialist country that doesn't enforce those ideas? That's the whole point. Socialism looks good on paper and propaganda, but in the real world it turns to dung.
And are you suggesting the Soviet Union wasn't a socialism driven country? That would turn every historybook ever written upside down and inside out.

I can name you dozens of 'democratic' countries that are even worse.

 

[Spitfire175]

No financial or political idea can work perfectly in reality, pure capitalism doesn't work just as much as pure socialism doesn't work. The USA isn't a socialist country, but neither is it a capitalist country it is a hybrid of the two. If either of the two were to be fully implemented there would be problems with both systems.

For instance the non-regulation of the financial market allowed for the credit crunch.

I have not said a word about capitalism and how well it works. I have been misguiding myself by ranting about marxist socialism, the kind that thrives for world revolution and people supposed(quite rightly) that I was yapping on about socialism in general.

 

[Spitfire175]

I can name you dozens of 'democratic' countries that are even worse.

Wasn't really my point, but so can I.

 

[Sibbo]

The Nazis were socialists.

thats all I have to say.

Also, just adding Godwin's Law there. Don't think anyone has said it yet.

 

[GHMonkey]

i could see it as the ideal, but lets face it, not everyone wants to be equal, some people will always want more than everyone else.

 

[Treblaine]

(looks at North Korea that stuck with absolute solialist ideology)

(looks that their Chinese neighbour that permitted free enterprise and was able to within one generation move from a third world country with famine killing millions to becoming one of the leading industrial manufacturers of the world)


yeah... socialism doesn't work.

A bit is all right but in only a light touch. The founding principal of free market cannot be resisted.

 

[Deimateos]

Ahem. Give me one socialist country that doesn't enforce those ideas? That's the whole point. Socialism looks good on paper and propaganda, but in the real world it turns to dung.
And are you suggesting the Soviet Union wasn't a socialism driven country? That would turn every historybook ever written upside down and inside out.

Whaaat? You want people to read history books for proof of bad ideas? But that requires logic, and it's so much easier to remain brainwashed into thinking that failed ideas are good!

Said socialist-positive brainwashing:
http://www.examiner.com/x-22208-Salt-Lake-City-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m9d4-The-dumbing-down-of-America

It is insanity to try and revive a system so proven to be a colossal failure and expect a different result "Because we're doing it".

Watch Socialism get completely owned (back in 1979!!!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs

Friedman was great. I particularly enjoy this quote of his:

"There are four ways in which you can spend money.

You can spend your own money on yourself.
When you do that, why then you really watch out what you?re doing, and you try to get the most for your money.

Then you can spend your own money on somebody else.
For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I?m not so careful about the content of the present, but I?m very careful about the cost.

Then, I can spend somebody else?s money on myself.
And if I spend somebody else?s money on myself, then I?m sure going to have a good lunch!

Finally, I can spend somebody else?s money on somebody else.
And if I spend somebody else?s money on somebody else, I?m not concerned about how much it is, and I?m not concerned about what I get. And that?s government. And that?s close to 40% of our national income."

 

[Warwolt]

The Nazis were socialists.

thats all I have to say.

I want to kill you and also I invoke godwins law.

 

[Spitfire175]

Whaaat? You want people to read history books for proof of bad ideas? But that requires logic, and it's so much easier to remain brainwashed into thinking that failed ideas are good!

No, I want them to see that even considering a full on socialist system will cause the worst kinds of humanitarian crisis.

The Nazis were socialists.

thats all I have to say.

I want to kill you and also I invoke godwins law.

Did you see what he posted later? In a less sophisticated environment I could say you were "trolled".

 

[oktalist]

State owned factories, no civil rights, a compulsory army, all key points of Hitler's regime and socialism in practicality.

Those things are anathema to what I call true socialism, which has never yet been tried anywhere in the world. Ideally there should be no armed forces. Factories should be owned by noone (or everyone, which is the same thing). Inidividual freedom is paramount, and small government is key.

Give me one socialist country that doesn't enforce those ideas?

Give me one socialist country, period.

And are you suggesting the Soviet Union wasn't a socialism driven country? That would turn every historybook ever written upside down and inside out.

Yes I am, and I suppose it might.

I think that is the thing when no matter what job you have you get the same pay as someone else with a higher skilled job or vice versa.

That's true insofar as noone gets paid anything. There is no currency in true socialism.

Why should I have to give someone something just because they were too lazy to get it themselves?

Because it wasn't yours in the first place. Most people cannot just sit around all day doing nothing and remain sane, so I think you're attacking a straw man.

Socialism makes achievement pointless, because anything you gain will be stolen from you by the government.

1. It can't be stolen from you if it wasn't yours to begin with.
2. The government takes nothing, it's your fellow citizens who reap the benefits of your labour. Say you are a farmer; a carpenter is entitled to as much of your harvest as he can carry, just as you are entitled to pick up some of the utilitarian furniture he produces. (It's not a trade, though: if your crop all got eaten by locusts you could still get that wardrobe you wanted.)

The Nazis were socialists.

The Nazis were Christian.

\o/

 

[Spitfire175]

And are you suggesting the Soviet Union wasn't a socialism driven country? That would turn every historybook ever written upside down and inside out.

Yes I am, and I suppose it might.

Well, if we are to believe anything ever written about the Soviet Union, you are plain wrong.