Facts About Socialism

Originally posted by cody599
The best example of socialism was (and I stress the WAS ) kibbutzism in Israel. I lived on a kibbutz for 10 years and tell I you that it was those that love to work for the greater good carrying leaches that found an easy life. The kibbutz movement has imploded and although they still call themselves kibbutz they now have differential wages and the original ideals are long defunked. Unfortnately socialism simply has no allowance for human nature and therefore cannot exist for long.

this is a good point. i am personally a gradualist. i feel that if we force socialism into society today, as the mindset of many is still focused on greed (in large part because of our indoctrination.... uh, i mean, educational system, and the media), the ideas will only wither away quickly. if we implement small, gradual changes, such as opening worker cooperatives and educating individuals on the tenets of true socialism, then eventually more and more people will realize that it is a good system to aspire to and we will slowly transform our society into a socialist one. i even consider socialist revolutions, whether or not they failed, to be a part of the gradualist change that needs to occur in order to get us to where we need to go.

btw, Freetown Christiania still works on the same socialist principles it was founded on and it is going 40 years strong now.

"A worker cooperative is a cooperative owned and democratically managed by its worker-owners... In traditional forms of worker cooperative, all shares are held by the workforce with no outside or consumer owners, and each member has one voting share. In practice, control by worker-owners may be exercised through individual, collective or majority ownership by the workforce, or the retention of individual, collective or majority voting rights (exercised on a one-member one-vote basis)."

Originally posted by Mijamija
The bosses handle the paperwork/management and the workers carry out the day to day business operations and they work in harmony to create the best product or service together because they know the better they work together the more profit they stand to make?

Exactly Mijamija, so in a sense, it encourages everyone to do what they are best at doing, not for the pursue of personal profit but for the cooperative.

Usually in companies, people rise in ranks till they are not good enough to go higher, thus, most of the management positions in the world are taken by people that don't really do their job optimally because when they do, they get advancements.
But in a cooperative, workers would be encourage to do what they do best without having a lower salary.

Personally, I know my strengths and I know my weaknesses. I do not want to work inefficiently...I want to be optimal.
I want to be the best at what I do, no matter what I do.

When you work in a team, you assign your units to their best position and work together towards a common goal. That's why humans are amazing, top of the chain on earth.

I strongly believe that socialism is a better model then capitalism to bring happiness to the majority of workers and society.

Christiana is very interesting to me, and I was wondering if the people that live in Christiana also all work in Christiana, or do they work in the "outside" world?

It sounds like a neat little place for sure....

Originally posted by Mijamija
Christiana is very interesting to me, and I was wondering if the people that live in Christiana also all work in Christiana, or do they work in the "outside" world?

It sounds like a neat little place for sure....

some work outside i believe, but the majority work inside. Christiania has its own monetary system and a plethora of worker cooperatives operate inside the community. a lot of people there also contribute by creating their own products and doing a lot of their own work for themselves and the community. Christiania and Pedersen bicycles are actually produced in Freetown Christiania:

www.christianiabikes.com...
www.pedersen-bike.dk...

here's some quick info on Christiania that includes discussion of where and how people work:

reply to post by User8911


I have had this argument before with people, basically what I find baffling about capitalism is the emphasis that is placed on the "value" of someone's work.

For example...

The guy that digs a ditch works his butt off but gets paid 15 bucks an hour

The guy that supervises him and tells him where and how to dig gets a salary which is much larger than the ditch digger.

Now....the ditch digger does physically demanding work.

The supervisor does mentally demanding work that requires knowledge/ critical thinking skills that the ditch digger does not have.

That supervisor is getting paid more simply because he has knowledge and the ability to process complex thoughts the ditch digger does not have( supposedly).

Is that fair? Is that right? Who decides that knowledge is worth more/has more value than physical labor? Why do they both not have EQUAL value? Is it because any strong guy can be a ditch digger, but not every strong guy has a brain capable of understanding complex thought processes?

I think the guys that have the brains and knowledge are the ones who "made the rules"

They are the same guys who say knowledge is power....and it is true in our current capitalist system.

Our founding fathers said all men were created equal....meaning made of the same stuff and born into this world the same, but it does not say men ARE equal....yeah.....let me chew on that one for a moment....I need to take a moment to process this....

I hope you can follow my train of thought...sorry, I am thinking as I'm writing and it is not a complete thought yet....

Originally posted by Mijamija
reply to post by User8911

 

I have had this argument before with people, basically what I find baffling about capitalism is the emphasis that is placed on the "value" of someone's work.

For example...

The guy that digs a ditch works his butt off but gets paid 15 bucks an hour

The guy that supervises him and tells him where and how to dig gets a salary which is much larger than the ditch digger.

Now....the ditch digger does physically demanding work.

The supervisor does mentally demanding work that requires knowledge/ critical thinking skills that the ditch digger does not have.

That supervisor is getting paid more simply because he has knowledge and the ability to process complex thoughts the ditch digger does not have( supposedly).

Is that fair? Is that right? Who decides that knowledge is worth more/has more value than physical labor? Why do they both not have EQUAL value? Is it because any strong guy can be a ditch digger, but not every strong guy has a brain capable of understanding complex thought processes?

I think the guys that have the brains and knowledge are the ones who "made the rules"

They are the same guys who say knowledge is power....and it is true in our current capitalist system.

Our founding fathers said all men were created equal....meaning made of the same stuff and born into this world the same, but it does not say men ARE equal....yeah.....let me chew on that one for a moment....I need to take a moment to process this....

I hope you can follow my train of thought...sorry, I am thinking as I'm writing and it is not a complete thought yet....

no, don't worry, it makes perfect sense to me. it kind of goes hand-in-hand with my idea of "taking the Labor Theory of Property (also known as the "Homesteading Principle") to its logical conclusions". i actually have a video where i discuss this. now keep in mind i made this a while ago and so i don't fully agree with every aspect of what i say here, but it is a general thought that i had and decided i needed to make it into a video:

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money to spend. Socialism is also the road to communism.

The taxes from people who work hard finance the laziness and irresponsible fecundity of the rest. The budget deficit arises from an overabundance of the latter group.

The NHS system in the UK is one of the greatest achievements ever and it is a model that many countries have copied.
That it is not as efficient as it should be is more down to serial mis-management and interference by politicians seeking to achieve some political gain than anything else..

It's very ethos and concept is very much 'socialist'.

I am by no means a socialist but there is not a thing anyone could post here on ATS that would convince me that the NHS is morally wrong and that private health care would be better for the vast majority of British people.

How many other 'socialist' applications would be beneficial to society if only people could see past their political restraints?

reply to post by joyride0187


*Facepalm*

Again...Socialism is workers' control over the means of production

There is no mention of taxes because they do not have to exist. The myth that socialism requires government is propaganda which was created to combat its growing popularity with the alternative which is capitalism, which (while effective) is as threatening to "freedom" as authoritative communism.

Communism is as much of a result of socialism, as fascism is as much of a result of capitalism. There are extremes to every system economic and political.

Originally posted by joyride0187
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money to spend. Socialism is also the road to communism.

The taxes from people who work hard finance the laziness and irresponsible fecundity of the rest. The budget deficit arises from an overabundance of the latter group.

Originally posted by Freeborn
The NHS system in the UK is one of the greatest achievements ever and it is a model that many countries have copied.
That it is not as efficient as it should be is more down to serial mis-management and interference by politicians seeking to achieve some political gain than anything else..

It's very ethos and concept is very much 'socialist'.

I am by no means a socialist but there is not a thing anyone could post here on ATS that would convince me that the NHS is morally wrong and that private health care would be better for the vast majority of British people.

How many other 'socialist' applications would be beneficial to society if only people could see past their political restraints?

edit on 9/2/12 by Freeborn because: clarity

it is pretty apparent to me that neither of you read the first post in this thread. either that or neither of you care to spend time learning things from a different perspective with an open mind.

reply to post by eboyd


Thank you for the video, that gives me some insight into how things operate within that community and it brought a smile to my face.

I have been to Denmark, but not Christiana and one thing I will say is every Danish person I encountered was friendly. Maybe I just had good luck, but somehow I do not think so...just being in Denmark was peaceful, there is something in the air there. I heard awhile back that Danish people are the happiest people according to a study, and I believe it.

I have always felt that small communities function much better than large ones......I think many people feel so lost and adrift in the world....no sense of community....often no strong family unit....no spiritual community...they know in their hearts something is lacking, there is something wrong, they are not at peace or harmony with the world around them, but it seems the people of Christiana are on to something....

reply to post by eboyd


Could you please explain how the fact that I posted one example of how a 'socialist' approach to something can and does work within a 'non-socialist' society prove that I didn't read or don't understand your OP?

reply to post by Mijamija
I would go further

The ditch digger knows how to dig ditches. The supervisor may or may not but could still dig a ditch at a pinch.

The ditch digger by performing his role allows the supervisor to perform his role so both have an equal part to play in digging ditches in the correct place. Why has one more value and receive more reward and why is that individual always the supervisor?

Why is the manager who receives instructions that ditches need to be dug and may or may not be able to ditch dig or point to where a ditch needs digging be of more value than the supervisor or ditch digger?

The ditch digger and supervisor allows the manager to play his role and not have to worry about how and where to dig ditches.

Now factor in the ditch digger has a real talent for digging ditches which allows the others to accept more ditch digging jobs. Why is he still the one to receive the least reward? Still be considered at the bottom and not as valuable as the supervisor and manager?

The examples you choose to give, without even looking at them closely to ascertain possible negative aspects, are too small to suggest it could work on any sort of large scale, in a world of nation states and cross national groupings.

Interesting reading though I think it is fair to say could do with some counterbalance

reply to post by eboyd


Okay, first off, thanks for taking the time to understand my thoughts, which were leading into several directions!

Second, I watched the video and it went over my head a bit. I am not schooled on economic theory, so I hope you will bear with me as I try to understand, please correct me if I have misunderstood something...

What I understood was that if a owner of a apple tree hires a person to pick the apples they should share the profit, and if they take those profits and buy a machine to pick the apples which increases the amount of apples being picked and there by increasing profits they both deserve those profits because it was both the owner providing the tree and the picker who initially picked the apples in the first place that allowed for the profit to be made in order to buy the machine?

reply to post by Freeborn


Was wondering that, he turned right bitchy there, wouldn't fancy working in a co operative with him!

reply to post by eboyd
Great points made

Another question related to your vid. What is the point or incentive of increasing the amount of apples being picked if only one person profits from it and at what point is it that enough apples and profit go to one person?

The only result of the greed of the one claiming all the profit is anger and envy and is more likely that the worker puts a spanner in the works destroying the profit of all. Where is the profit in that?

reply to post by Freeborn
I agree. The care of the elderly is a great case in point. It is pretty much in the hands of private health care and fails to provide care.

The NHS is used as a political football. Has waste at the top caused by those who would destroy it but at the business end, medical care I maintain the NHS outperforms any private systems and always will.

reply to post by colin42


Colin, you bring up a interesting point....without the guy doing the "hard labor" the supervisor and manager would not have a job, they both need that guy out there doing the hard work.

If he wasn't doing his job, the whole project would fall apart.....and then the manager would find another ditch digger to do the job......maybe the new guy digs better, faster is more efficient....

Kinda like how when people are not productive enough at their job they get the axe....

So is the value of work really equal? One guys digs super well, super fast--the other guy does not.

Again, I am just contemplating these things.....not comming to any sort of conclusions....

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by eboyd

 

Could you please explain how the fact that I posted one example of how a 'socialist' approach to something can and does work within a 'non-socialist' society prove that I didn't read or don't understand your OP?

because, as it doesn't pertain to the principle of workers' ownership of the means of production, it isn't socialistic. the health care system in the UK is NOT socialistic. if it were, that would mean that the people who work at the hospitals and other medical centers would be equal owners of them and would have equal business decision making power.