posted on Mar, 8 2013 @ 11:35 AM
The op has pointed out about the fact that the world has been brainwashed to think that socialism is a bad form of government and that it is not so
bad as what is believed to think.
While that may be true, the countries that he mentioned, are and were traditionally communist in nature and ideology. And before continuing, lets
look at what the accpeted definition of what is the difference in the different types of governments, and the examples that come around from such.
Communism: Communism came from the writings and ideals written by a man called Karl Marx. Under that form of government, the basis is that everyone
is equal, there is no classes, and that the government would control 100% of all of the country, to include the businesses, and the people. The
government would dictate where you live, what you can and can not do, what you can eat, and aquire from your work. You have just enough, as it was a
theory put forth by Marx, that held that the development of the suberabundance of material wealth lead to social downfall, and that everyone should be
equal. Lennin, took the ideal and added to it, to where it led to more of a worker participation, those who worked hard would be provided for and
those who were rich were evil and bad, and should be punished. Most of the countries that came to be communist, such as the USSR, China and Cuba, saw
the rise of and were under the yoke of such a government that progressively got more and more restrictive. The lose of businesses that came out often
ment that either the government closed them down or took them over directly.
Socialism: Is an economic system where the main parts of society is controlled by social ideas and the will of the majority of the people. Many
businesses that could be considered there for the good of the entire people would be taken over, while those that are minor or lesser would not be
touched, or even ignored. Here again ultimately it leads to where some there is a redistribution of wealth in its society, to where it tries to help
all of those in its citizens, ideally it is a good idea, but when it translates out it turns out to be a diseaster in the long run economically, as
many decisions are made by the government and not the individuals. Countries that have gone to socialism, would be more those that you see currently
in Europe, though many try to keep the distance from that term due to the history that is associated with a Socialism. The best example of such that
can be brought up where it was pure and straight forward would be Argentina, during the days of Peron.
Capitalism is not a form of government but an economic idea. But what many people tend to forget about such, is that with this system, there is
always a winner and a loser in that form of society. It means that someone is going to succeed in their endevors, that businesses are there to make a
profit, and that there will be losers, where a person will looses everything. There will be both rich and poor, and all inbetween. As with
everything there is an niche for all sorts of businesses, and like all aspects, it is straight forward competition in the business world.
And most democracies that many would speak of are in reality are republics, where there is a person who speaks for a group, rather than the individual
speaking on every issue. While one will find that such is either good or bad, the ideas behind such is often that the majority rules and the minority
have rights. Many of those countries have some social aspects to it, as to protect its citizens. But the problems are coming out that with larger
numbers of citizens, the amount is starting to over weigh the economies of many countries around the world.
Now as the op has pointed out, such is better than most demoncracies and capitalism, the points that are not brought out, is the mass murders that
countries such as Germany, USSR, China, Cuba had gone through during the initial set ups and running of those governments. Where those that spoke
against the government would ulitmately be silenced either by threat or by out right disappearing. Countries like Argentina, which was elected by a
democratic means to be socilaist, before Peron, had a beef industry that was on top of the world and a gold reserve that was the envy of the rest of
the world only to turn out to about bankrupt the country after the fall of Juan Peron, and those are the kinds of examples that are never talked about
or discussed. If you need another example they are still cleaning up the mess in Cambodia, post Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. No this is not
brainwashing, but a sanatization of the facts that come out and mass graves of people who do not lie. Nor do the economic states of many of the
European countries that are in trouble, which have strong socialistic ideas, do not lie either, as they are either failing or on the verge of
exploding from the turmoil of having to make changes to save themselves.
No system of government is perfect, there will always be problems but if it entails the outright killing of people who speak out against their
government, where people who work hard for what they own have it stolen from them cause it is deemed that they have too much, then perhaps it is not
such a good ideal either.
Ultimately what one could say is that most of the countries that have been or are of a socialist nature, were used as stepping stones by dictators to
take control of a country and start a brutal regiem.