It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why is Socialism so heavily disliked?

page: 5
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Why is Socialism so heavily disliked?

I think it has a lot to do with a very successful CIA operation. The boys & girls at Langley sure hit it out of the park on that one.




posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: lydie15

Socialism is so heavily disliked in the US because it has been the target of a century's worth of focused propaganda against it. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with Socialism, any more than there is with Capitalism.

The form of a governmental or economic system matters less than the quality of the people implementing it. Most of the examples of Socialism that are held up for review in the US are actually oppressive governments using the term (and some of the trappings of) Socialism as a cover. We can pick just a few examples - the USSR is one. They called themselves a Socialist Republic, but the reality is that there was a core of people who managed to concentrate most of the wealth and political power in the country into themselves. To further their own agendas, not that of the country, or countries in this case. So there was basically a group of people who wanted all the power and wealth for themselves and to hell with the rest of the population.

If that sounds familiar, it should. It is exactly what is and has been happening in the US for a few decades now. Here, it's called Capitalism, the Soviets called it Socialism. But it is the same damn thing - concentration of all wealth and power into the hands of a small - very small - portion of the population.

So the reason the term "Socialism" is so despised in the US is the result of propaganda. There are many examples of Socialistic economies that are working just fine, and the people that live in those places have in the main a better standard of living than do we in the US.

If we use a short, general definition of "good government" to be a political and economic system that seeks to establish an environment that promotes the best possible life for the largest number of people living there, then any form of government will work for that assuming the people implementing it are honest about what they are trying to do, and are not in actual fact trying to do nothing other than concentrate wealth and power into their own specific group. Dictatorship, monarchy, socialist, capitalist - any of them will work. The problem is the quality of implementation.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: blood0fheroes

All right. Taxation is theft. There. No more taxes.

Also: no more army, navy or air force. No police force, penal system or judicial apparatus. No laws or legal contracts. No recourse to law if someone steals from you or rapes you. No fire department.

No more large state-funded public works: no highways, railways, ports, airports, bridges, tunnels, power plants or distribution networks except those which are run for profit. No small ones either: not so much as a playground slide.

No management of public lands. No wildlife or forestry services. No support for land tenure; anyone more powerful than you can move into your house and throw you out and all you can do about it is physically evict him. If you can.

No protection for the environment. No state agencies to coordinate a response to natural disasters or epidemics. No weather department.

No schools except private ones. No hospitals or clinics except private ones. No public medical or scientific research facilities. No public libraries. No public art galleries, only private ones.

No public toilets, only private ones.

I could go in this vein ad nauseam, but I think I have made my point. Socialists are touchingly gullible concerning human nature, but compared with anarchists and libertarians they’re as sharp as tacks.


edit on 2/4/16 by Astyanax because: it wasn’t sharp enough.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Vector99
Because people are narcissistic and feel the need to be "better" than another.
without compitition you wouldn't enjoy the life you do today. It's disturbing how short-sighted folks like you are.

You obviously like to predicate your preconceived notions of another individual. I'm the short-sighted one?


Yes, suggesting that competition is "narcissism" is idiotic.

What do you consider "competition"?



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
U.S.S.R.

The goal of socialism is communism. Vladimir Lenin

Maybe that's why?

www.brainyquote.com...


True communism is having all the citizens working together without a central authority. It is anarchy with little or no government. You cant get to Communism without going through Socialism first. You can't have successful anarchy unless the people are working toward common goals. So those calling for no government and no socialism or communism have no idea what they are talking about. Their anarchy is Armageddon. It won't be until people really understand what is what before we can move on to a saner system.

Until then; Capitalism for our Wants, Socialism for our Needs.
edit on 2-4-2016 by sligtlyskeptical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: lydie15

Both are perpetual slave systems. A democratic, moneyless, communist technocracy is the only path to true freedom.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

I'm not often in the habit of repeating myself, however you must have either misread my wording, or have argued this before, against a mind possessed of less clarity.

originally posted by: blood0fheroes
a reply to: Astyana
A bargain in what way? A contract?
As I see it, involuntary taxation is the same "bargain" the average mugger would offer - comply and you might keep your life.

Emphasis added, for clarity.
As stated previously, I have no qualms with socialism per se. I simply cannot see how it can ever incorporate the principles I personally hold dear.
The problem as I see it -is that socialism simply cannot out compete capitalism, and thus its adherents must resort to force (via government) in order to accomplish their goals.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Vector99
Because people are narcissistic and feel the need to be "better" than another.
without compitition you wouldn't enjoy the life you do today. It's disturbing how short-sighted folks like you are.

You obviously like to predicate your preconceived notions of another individual. I'm the short-sighted one?


Yes, suggesting that competition is "narcissism" is idiotic.

I suggested capitalistic competition is narcissism.

Would you like to explain how it isn't?



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I see it as capitalism being an economic system, and socialism being pretty much what it sounds like, a political ideology pertaining more to people and society.

The two things are always in conflict and nearly always exist in the same space.

Unfortunately, greed and avarice are capitalist tendencies and mean that the economic vultures who have the money can afford to basically force policy though financial pressure to make themselves more money.

I would be happy to pay a little more in order to not have to be concerned with educational and medical expenses so much, pretty much the same as we all contribute a bit of our wealth toward roads and such.

Capitalists don't want to pay anything toward the benefit of the whole because they already have the wealth not to have to worry about it, leaving the rest of society to suffer and scrape by with less and less return for their labor every minute of every day with their legal machinations and monetary schemes.

Capitalism benefits more from Socialism, more than society benefits from Capitalism.

What was supposedly created by the people, of the people and for the people has become solely for the benefit of business.

From my observations, truthfully, business has become a very nearly a criminal endeavor.

Man is the apex predator, and his prey is his fellow man.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

Taxation is only theft if you see no benefit from paying your taxes, we really don't visualize as much benefit as we should considering how much tax wealth is taken.

The capitalists have devised ways of diverting tax wealth to themselves instead of using it for it's intended purpose.

I don't see the government as either capitalist or socialist.

I see it as more a predatory, opportunistic type thing.

A Chimera sort of monster/beast/human thing.

Unnatural.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: lydie15

Because Congress cannot be trusted to spend money in a socialist economy. They can't even be trusted to spend in our mix of socialism and capitalism as it is.

Fix corruption in government first, then let's talk about socialism.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Vector99
Because people are narcissistic and feel the need to be "better" than another.
without compitition you wouldn't enjoy the life you do today. It's disturbing how short-sighted folks like you are.

You obviously like to predicate your preconceived notions of another individual. I'm the short-sighted one?


Yes, suggesting that competition is "narcissism" is idiotic.

I suggested capitalistic competition is narcissism.

Would you like to explain how it isn't?



Like it or not, money is probably the biggest motivator for excellence. Socialism is not going to change that.
edit on 2-4-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

If someone is benefited directly or indirectly through taxation by force, does that mean that they also concede - directly, or indirectly - to the other uses their tax dollars fund?



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Answer me why Russian rockets are the ONLY thing used right now to get people to space. Communist built USSR rockets.


Because the US shut down the space shuttle program, Duh. They decided in the long run short missions to the space station etc could be provided by a private company cheaper.

Guess what they were right. SpaceX in about a year will have rockets that will be 10 times cheaper to launch than Russia that will be going to the space station. This in fact is a great example of why capitalism is superior. Because spacex needs to compete with the European space agency and Russia to get launches, they knew they needed a cheaper launch because they did not have the track record of dozens of successful launches like their competitors.

So they designed a cheaper much superior rocket - cost about 60 million, and have almost perfected landing it so it can be reused multiple times, which will cut launch costs down hugely since fuel is a very small percentage of launch cost. None of that would exist if there was some government owned manufacturer that had no motivation to innovate because they were guaranteed funding no matter what.

All you have to do is look at the history of inventions, the vast vast majority come in capitalism. I for one want continued progress. It can all be boiled down to this statement - Without risk there is no reward. Socialism encourages less risk.




edit on 2-4-2016 by proximo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit




The Fruits of other Peoples Labor taken from them by Force . A Form of Slavery . This Appeals to whom ? Ignorant People without the Intelligence to see the Reality of it


What high moral ground did the Bankers use to get out of jail free during the GFC. Ah they were true socialists when it suited them. Played at gambling then when they went too far they got reclassified as an essential service "too big to fail" They were quite happy to be bailed out by the Taxpayer with the help of their cronies in Government. They were happy to be Socialist with other peoples money...

Whats even funnier is that you people argue over some theoretical economic model over another when those idealist models are never truly practised anyway. They assist in writing the laws so there is never any moral accountability.
Whilst you're arguing the debt accrued in the socializing of private debt/insolvency will never be paid off in your lifetimes.

They laugh at you while drinking at the trough of the taxpayer. Sure looks like Capitalism taking money by force to me.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: lydie15

It is not, at it's core Socialism is fundemental christian social value and Marx did not invent it he merely codified it around the injustice's of his day, his political model need's some serious work though.

Democratic Socialism with Capitalism on a leash is the only way to create a fair and just society.

First the vested interests of the ultra elite own the media, only small newspapers are in some places still free of this control and they tend to have there own agenda but the bulk of the mainstream media is geared to brainwash and mis-educate the public into believing socialism is evil which is perverse since socialism is litterally the politics of the populace.

Then there are other matter's to remember, COMMUNISM was not socialism, in socialism there is democratic process in communism there is none.

In socialism society is fair, acts like an exteneded family to look after the elderly and the sick and to provide support and help to those down on there luck with state safety net's, education and health care are high quality and free for all and there is a state pension system and family come's first with society being extended family but in communism the elderly are shipped off to old folk's home's, the workers are housed in blocks like open air prisons and freedom of choice is curtailed with an everyone is a drone to the master party and the emperor leader attitude.

Capitalism and Communism come to the same end, A few ultra powerful ruling over everyone else with slightly more freedom in a democratic capitalist society but just as little as the soviet union in a totalitarian capitalist society in which the people are under control?,. The few end up in control of the many, they have it all and the many have nothing unless the few let them have some, the real NWO of ultra capitalist corporation's, bank's with there corrupt right wing politicians and the COMMUNIST apparatchik with it's commissars in big luxury dacha's with all the perk's have much in common and outward appearance's aside are much the same corrupt creature's with the difference the Commissars at first take by force and the Capitalist at first manipulate, lie to and defrauds you.

Socialism work's best at the small scale at the cultural level so a mixed society of both capitalist and socialist values with a cultural socalist safety net is the only sane and normal system but this is not achieved by the politicians or ever by right wing politician's, it has to come from the society itself and be rooted in it's culture to be effective.

In eastern Europe the word SOCIALISM has been linked deeply at the psychological level with two heinous systems of the twentieth century Communism and National Socialist (NAZISM which has of course nothing at all to do with socialism).


English Socialism (OLD LABOUR) is about Freedom, freedom from worry, job security, freedom of movement within your society, fairness and the ability to climb the ladder for everyone with the state giving a helping hand by providing free state education, health and well being and Society level happiness for the bulk of the population - those that the Tory elite call the Pleb's (Latin Patrician upper class of rome - Plebian's Lower class of rome, serfs a hairs breadth in esteem above a slave).

Capitalism is at root inhumane, YOU are an asset, your life is of value and is estimated but only so long as you are a worker after which you are superfluous so should die off unless you have built up assets to be regarded as wealthy enough that they become your value, even your body is of value in death it is just capitalism at work exploit it until it dies then exploit it some more.


Socialism is about care, you are brother to your fellow man so don't treat him like a dog, it takes more than one person to move that heavy weight so do it together, if your brother is ill then give him some food, shelter and health care, if you are old and can no longer work but are poor that's ok because your family the society around you is still there to provide shelter, support and even a pension so you can buy some of the thing's you want and you won't starve or die of cold.

Capitalism of the past put the poor into WORK HOUSES, essentally they were enslaved and made into the PROPERTY of the work house owners a little like the US prison system with so many people in prison and prison's spinning huge profit's, something is direly wrong there.
Debters Prison's, if you could not pay you would be imprisoned until you could and they also acted as another form of work house but tended to be more for the upper class of educated rather than the uneducated Plebian's.

I could go on and on and on but to cut to the chase.

Brainwashing and media control based on FALSE SOCIALISM such as COMMUNISM AND NAZI'sm is the reason so many people think it is evil.
They believe they are free under a capitalist system, funny that because they are owned, there land is owned and even the great American dream was sold out to the corporations in the twentieth century when Corporate regulation was abolished over there making it unattainable for the vast majority of people there except as a DREAM and an idiology exploited to control and manipulate the way they think.

edit on 2-4-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: lydie15
This won't be a very big post, as I am genuinely interested in knowing the answer. I don't really want to put too much of my opinion out there, because quite frankly, I haven't investigated too far into the pro's and con's of Capitalism vs. Socialism to be able to provide a substantiated argument.

I have, however, always held quite a positive opinion on Socialism. I have failed to see the flaws in the system that so many people mention there are in Socialism. I do have a massive problem with corporate Capitalism (for many reasons). I don't think Capitalism in general is bad, but I fail to understand why it is better than Socialism, and why Socialism is so heavily criticised.

I'm also confused as to why so many people support Capitalism, where there is obviously many flaws in the way it works. BUT, this may be attributed to corporate Capitalism being more dominant than pure Capitalism. But isn't any economic system somewhat flawed? What makes Capitalism THE absolute best economic system we can have? Why is there not much discussion in the idea of either adopting a Socialist-like economic system, even if it is still mostly Capitalist in its roots?







Soc has mass appeal and very easy to sell to the uninformed.

Soc assumes people will work as hard for the greater good as they will work for themselves.

Soc assumes that experts can know everything for everybody.

Soc has no way to determine prices, which leads to economic stagnation.

Soc always uses the gov and always makes the gov stronger and stronger over time.

Bigger stronger gov is the means by which corporations get real power outside of the market.

Capitalism is not political but gets blamed for political outcomes. Capitalism gets blamed for gov powers that are socialistic in de facto political actions.


edit on 2-4-2016 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Socialism isn't a Christian value, and neither was Jesus a socialist, though we hear that myth being told enough.

Socialism is not synonymous with caring and charity, with giving to the poor, with loving your neighbor etc. What a flurry of glittering generalities. Advocating for more taxes, social safety nets, and the guiding hand of the government is actually the least one can do in terms of caring and charity, giving to the poor, and loving your neighbor. If people wanted to do those things they would go do them, regardless of which economic system or political philosophy is in place.

Neither is socialism akin to a close-knit community.

Nazism and Stalinism and Maoism were deeply influenced by socialism.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99




The roman empire fell. You stated antiquated methods of government. Those may have worked before technology was a thing


Wow.. you don't suppose the art of government and bureaucracy and taxation or the building of cities, armies, etc are evidence of Technology? Or did you think technology became a thing since the PC?



One of the reasons ancient ideas worked was simply there was no transit of information. now there is, and modern rome would fall in 2 weeks.


Of course there was transmission of information - Did you ever hear of the trade routes bringing goods and knowledge from far off lands? Who says Rome fell, ever hear of this thing called Catholicism or the Vatican?




Again, what method would work?


No system can ever reward man fairly for his own efforts, he will always lose some of it to inflation (government created through the money supply) whether capital is acquired by corporations for reinvestement and expansion or savings accumulated by individuals - there is always taxation that favours the super wealthy, and Fiat money creation by bankers.

Ever wonder why you pay bank fees to use your own money, after all they are only 0's and 1's in a computer - what great labour do banks input into the economy?

You do the math.



posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight



Past Presidents, not including the Founding Fathers "Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce." — James A. Garfield, President of the United States "

A great industrial nation is controlled by it's system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the world--no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men." —
President Woodrow Wilson Founding Father's Quotes on Banking (Maybe some repeats from "Founding Father's Quotes" / Information tends to converge)

Thomas Jefferson "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." — Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President.

Andrew Jackson "If Congress has the right [it doesn't] to issue paper money [currency], it was given to them to be used by...[the government] and not to be delegated to individuals or corporations" — President Andrew Jackson, Vetoed Bank Bill of 1836

James Madison "History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it's issuance." — James Madison



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join