Socialism is the best ideology

reply to post by fadedface

Socialism is the fairest and most equal political ideology where wealth is evenly distributed through all levels of society and the means of production is cooperatively organised and run by the working class. Trade and manufacture is based on necessity and everyone is designated a job based on their abilities and capabilities. All industry is owned by the 'State' and constitutes a nationalised publicly owned body which encompasses everything from high tech mechanised industry to service and goods and food outlets. In this scenario private commerce and ownership as well as free enterprise and entrepreneurialism will be abolished. The socialist state system will based on equality there will be no competition and no winners or losers and no class divisions.

This seems like yet another topic where we need to stop painting everything in black and white. What you described above contains socialist elements but I believe a more apt title for such a system would be "communism". You've described the ultimate nanny state where the Government controls and owns everything, they even decide what job we get. Count me out of this dreadful society you think is the "best ideology". In reality all societies have some socialist elements, the Government taxes us to pay for public services such as welfare and healthcare systems. Like everything else in life, I think the correct solution is the right balance between Government regulation and free market capitalism. Having no regulations can obviously cause problems but having too many regulations and too much Government intervention can lead to even greater problems. Taking either ideology to the extreme will no doubt always lead to failure.

reply to post by beezzer

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by fadedface

 

Okay. I'll attempt to be fair.

Can you please show me a country where socialism has successfully been implemented?

Here? The United Kingdom? France? They all have socialist programs in place as do we. Can you please show us a country which has a free market system. You know? The one with a purely private healthcare system, private education system, no welfare system. Let us know will ya?

Let me just also note, we're not talking about communism here. We're talking about socialism, much like universal healthcare is 'socialist'. If you want to give us an example of a country that you believe is not socialist at all, let me know.

Is this another NWO attempt to sell Socialism? George Soros must have hired more people to push their plan . Agenda 21 is not socialism it is Totalitarianism . Any one who likes Socialism , there are many failed examples around the world you can enjoy . Get to it .
The real power behind the NWO is the Bankster Ashkenazi Jews and their plan for world domination is called the Protocols of Zion . In that plan they favor Communism and Jewish control of it .

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by fadedface

 

Okay. I'll attempt to be fair.

Can you please show me a country where socialism has successfully been implemented?

I understand that as an ideology, in a classroom setting, this might be a fair system. I'm simply looking at real world applications of this ideology.

The Scandanavian Countries are pretty close and they do quite well.

Originally posted by 727Sky

wiki.answers.com...

1.6 million
Surprisingly not much as compare to Stalin and Mao Zedong

When you have the ability to put somewhere between 1.6 and 2 million people to death you can be very modest and unassuming for no one is going to mess with you.

Where are people going to school today and learning to hold in high esteem one of the 20th century's greatest butchers? That post should make everyone believe in home schooling!!

Why is it that everytime socialism comes up people start harping about how many people were killed in the 20th century by socialists/communists?

Why doesn't anyone ever consider how many have been killed by capitalists over the centuries (plural)?

It isn't a valid argument against socialism. And if it were - socialism would come out looking much better, by the numbers, then capitalism.

reply to post by fadedface


History completely disproves your statements. If socialism and communism were so wonderful, why were so many people risking everything to escape from those countries and come to the West? Why have so many immigrated to America for a chance at the now disappearing American dream?

Why is the American Dream disappearing? It's because Cloward and Piven's strategy to overwhelm the system with more and more programs, giveaways, welfare has destroyed the middle class. Allowing companies to move their factories overseas in a "global" economy has screwed the middle class. There will ultimately be two classes in America. The Lords and the surfs and if you don't like it there are no other countries to escape to. All that will be left is either accepting your servitude gratefully, going through re-education, or being killed. Remember, the 1960's hippies believed a certain amount of people would have to be killed to make utopia a reality. That was an acceptable cost.

We only have a little while longer here in America to remember when we were once free and had opportunity. Then we can relate that time to our grandchildren as the listen on in disbelief about "freedom" and how we gave it away for security.

I'm not sure if the OP is talking about Socialism in reference to the ideals of Marx or is misconstruing what Socialism is in reality and trying to accomplish -- frankly, I've never med Marx -- although I should. The best reason to read Marx is because a lot of people denounce him -- a lot of people who I don't respect hate him. Just as all the truly heroic people I've learned of are crushed by the system.

But I'd like to disagree with this statement; "everyone is designated a job based on their abilities and capabilities" -- I think there are better ways to ALLOW for people to be productive without requiring "designation". I don't want to get bogged down in details -- suffice to say, there are ways to make things "FAIR" -- but what we really need is to make things "WORK" for the Common Good. There are many who think we should not be about the common good -- I'm not sure if they think it's wrong or it cannot be achieved -- I suspect a little of both. In my mind; the Common Good is the only thing that justifies me or anyone supporting a government if we are not "on top" of the dog pile.

There are many who hate any notion of Socialism or Communism and it's kind of meaningless to just use these words without a lot of context on what someone MEANS between "real world" examples, and philosophical ideals. I'd rather start with a vision; of what is possible and what we need to avoid. I remember watching Gene Roddenberry's "Star Trek" as a kid -- I'm not talking about the later versions of Star Trek, but the original, incredibly positive view of humanity as the hero. The entire show was incredibly subversive in a way -- it was saying; "This is what Humanity is like if we have given up hurting each other, and look out for the Common Good of the all intelligent life." That's even more grandiose than the "common good" of a country. Not a lot was pointed out about the economy. On the star ship Enterprise -- everyone was active and productive in roles that perfectly fit their abilities and temperament. There was no want or needs -- people got access to work on projects based on their interest in doing them. Nobody was struggling to "get" anything, they were all totally dedicated and inspired by their role in making the Federation better -- pushing humanity forward. Learning for it's own sake.

I've always felt that "money" was actually the worst motivator -- for most people. What MOST people want is more friends, more respect and more success at whatever motivated them. Money is a consolation prize for that, it also allows you to get stuff for leisure. You pay bills with it. You hope to provide for your kids education, retirement, not worry about getting sick -- things that in a Socialist state you just "get". People who are truly money motivated, tend to be kind of broken in a way, replacing money and power for the emptiness they feel. They are people who constantly need affirmation, sex -- to win. But still; we all need money to get by and it feels nice to have some stashed away -- because you fear what happens if you are broke, more than anything else.

>> Now I don't want to get into how we get to the "meritocracy without want" that we see in Star Trek -- because FIRST, people have to make it a goal and think it is possible. However, if some people can't be sold on the vision of the potential -- they need to understand that our current STATUS QUO cannot be maintained. It will be impossible for most of the people in America to be gainfully employed in the near future - not unless someone pays you to spy on your neighbor.

Capitalism demands MORE PROFIT -- otherwise money follows the company making more profit than yours -- so there is no way to "self limit" built into the DNA of a corporation (as we know them). Consider that right now, the last "exploited people" are becoming part of a Capitalist market. Unless someone has a lot more babies, then there aren't going to be new consumers. The 10% year over year growth demands more efficiency, more energy (as in fuel resources), more markets -- and we only have so much population to squeeze on so much planet. "Peak GDP" is a greater concern than Peak Oil.

MEANWHILE - we are close to the "singularity" -- the time when Computers can have human level intelligence. So while growth will peak, employment will peak faster -- shovel ready jobs don't employ when you have robots working cheaper than the cost of feeding a slave.

How does a "free market" contend with shrinking resources, markets and less demand for labor -- which means fewer people with more money an more people with less? Either war breaks out to create demand and scarcity (big wars), or some hellish dystopia creates a Darwinian police state -- I don't see any positive outcome from this path.

I have a lot of ideas on how you could make an actual Meritocracy without "designation" or even bothering to achieve "fairness" -- but I just want people to really think about the idea that we CANNOT keep growing.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by fadedface

 

History completely disproves your statements. If socialism and communism were so wonderful, why were so many people risking everything to escape from those countries ...

They were risking everything to escape totalitarian regimes. People actually try and move to Sweden and Norway, which are Socialist Democracies. However there are no "pure" systems out there. Every system has various degrees of success and failure in different areas.

Originally posted by fadedface
reply to post by jiggerj

 

I don't care what you think of me and I'm not interested in discussing this with you or getting into any argument.

But how full communism would operate and the possibilities of social structures it offers can easily be read about I won't patronize you by giving any links to the necessary information.

edit on 17-5-2013 by fadedface because: (no reason given)

Man, you just don't get it. It is not the ideal that is flawed. It's the human nature behind it. It really is frustrating when people think they know all about governments and societies, yet have NO CLUE on humanity.

reply to post by polarwarrior

But having said that, the main motivation should be the knowledge that you helped humanity, if you're only in it for the money then you're not driven by passion.

What I hear is you want people to do great things in order to be a valued member of society. This would be GREAT, but that's not how humans are. Before we look at all the good points in a system (the system could even be perfect), we first have to understand just what drives the human animal.

All the great and mighty nations throughout history didn't fall because of the system of government. The all fell because of HUMAN lust for power, HUMAN greed, HUMAN ambition, HUMAN selfishness, HUMAN lack of foresight. No system of government can succeed as long as humans are running the show.

Originally posted by jiggerj
No system of government can succeed as long as humans are running the show.

Quite the pessimist huh?

I don't know, I think we will get it right some day. Humans aren't that bad, we do a lot of great stuff - 2 sides to the coin and all that.

Originally posted by polarwarrior

Originally posted by jiggerj
No system of government can succeed as long as humans are running the show.

Quite the pessimist huh?

I don't know, I think we will get it right some day. Humans aren't that bad, we do a lot of great stuff - 2 sides to the coin and all that.

LOL People keep saying I'm a pessimist for stating facts. Am I a pessimist for stating that lions hunt down other animals? If not, then what is so negative about understanding and accepting human nature? On the reverse side, it would be very ignorant to ignore the human factor in any and all human endeavors.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Why should scientists and doctors strive to find cures when they get the same of everything as everyone else? In manufacturing, where is the incentive to create quality products. Answer: fear. Fear of those in power.

Total fail.

Money is a surprisingly poor motivator. Let me ask you something. Who would you rather have do surgery on you? Someone who makes $60,000 a year and does it because they love helping people, or someone who makes $360,000 and does it for the cash?

People don't just enter professional work because it pays more. They enter it because nonprofessional work sucks. Even if I got $60,000 for waiting tables or cleaning toilets I'd still find it worthwhile to go to school so I could make the same amount of money and have a more interesting, challenging and relaxing job. You might say well they need the extra money to pay off their student debt but in a communist country obviously college would be much more affordable.

What a complete berk.....!

Socialism? Like a slightly watered down version of Communism!!! Yeah.... like the Soviet Union ideal where everyone was equal and 20 million got killed !!!!

Let me guess.

You're unemployed, the state supports you and you do nothing for it?

Imagine everyone being the same even if you train 9 years to be a surgeon or have no skills and dig ditches, or are a bit lazier than the next guy or .....\

You'd have to be crazy to think this would work..... wait, I hear the sirens on the psycho van coming to get you now

Originally posted by MadMax7
What a complete berk.....!

Socialism? Like a slightly watered down version of Communism!!! Yeah.... like the Soviet Union ideal where everyone was equal and 20 million got killed !!!!

How many people have capitalist regimes killed over the centuries? I bet it's a lot more than 20 million.

Originally posted by MadMax7
Let me guess.

You're unemployed, the state supports you and you do nothing for it?

Imagine everyone being the same even if you train 9 years to be a surgeon or have no skills and dig ditches, or are a bit lazier than the next guy or .....

You'd have to be crazy to think this would work..... wait, I hear the sirens on the psycho van coming to get you now

That actually demonstrates one of the reasons capitalism doesn't work anymore. Due to automation (factory robots, self-checkout, etc) there simply aren't as many jobs as people. What's gonna happen to those people who can't get jobs? Are we just going to demonize them as lazy and kick them out on the street? And then when they beg for our quarters put them in jail for aggressive panhandling?

There has to be redistribution of wealth. It's downright cruel for there not to be.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by fadedface

Originally posted by Astrocyte
Socialism has been proven defunct, worthless, a pipe dream, corrosive to liberty, and in the form of communism, a prelude to mass murder.

Capitalism only murders poor people of course but then again its their own fault for being poor isn't it?

No, capitalism has increased the standard of living for everyone and gives people incentive to succeed. From horse and buggy to trains to airplanes: capitalism. Cures for diseases that used to kill and crippple: capitalism.

Socialism and communism bring death by the truckload.

How do you know it was capitalism that brought that ingenuity? We live in the most capitalistic era in history and I see much less ingenuity and innovation than there was 100 years ago. Capitalism leads to commercialism which actually hinders progress.

The Soviet Union actually did some pretty amazing science as well. Money is not the only motivator for innovation. The main motivation is improving the human condition. Einstein didn't come up with his theories so he could make a quick buck.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Man, you just don't get it. It is not the ideal that is flawed. It's the human nature behind it. It really is frustrating when people think they know all about governments and societies, yet have NO CLUE on humanity.

Except that human nature is not a static thing. The idea of a self didn't even fully develop until the invention of the mirror in the late Middle Ages. Private property, the building block of capitalism is a very new concept in the relative scheme of human history. We were "communists" for the vast majority of our existence as a species.

People shared everything and yes there was resentment against people who didn't work, because everyone had to do their part in order for the tribe to survive.

Nowadays robots, computers and machines do the parts that in the past were done by people. So nowadays some people have no choice but to do nothing and collect benefits. It's actually capitalism that permits this because if we had a socialist system we could redistribute work hours as well as wealth so everyone could have a job and we would all have more leisure time.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
The truth is that more Americans have a better standard of living than anywhere else in the world. Whereas starvation kills most poor people in the world, obesity is the primary health problem of our poorest. Whereas the poorest people in the various "workers paradises" might have only one pair of shoes, ours have color TVs and X-boxes. Your attempt to use the US as an example actually shows the superiority of capitalism over socialism.

Of course you don't want to debate me, you've put no rational thought into it other than "I want to bring anyone down to my level who has more than me."

I want to correct some errors here. First of all the rest of the world is not nearly as impoverished as you think. Africa hasn't had a major famine since the 90's and believe it or not the majority of the world's people now own a cell phone. Many own TVs almost all color now no matter what country you're in. Only about 15 percent of the world's population is truly in dire poverty, most people are doing pretty well financially now. While their national GDP and their purchasing power per capita might be lower than the west you have to consider that their economies work totally differently. Most people in the world are actually quite fine - Africa, parts of south and southeast Asia, and certain spots of Latin America being the main exceptions.

And obesity is partially a problem because healthy food is expensive compared to cheap filler food. Many Americans are a paycheck away from the street. It's true we have more disposable income than any country on Earth but that's in large part because we work so much and it's definitely not distributed evenly. Technology is cheap nowadays thanks to Moore's law and frivolous entertainment has not improved happiness levels. It's much more affordable to own an Xbox or an iPhone than it is to buy groceries or pay rent. According to some statistics 1 in 5 American children are undernourished.