Politics/Religion | Socialism

Options: add reply
bookmark this topic
track this topic
track this category
start topic
rss

Poll for November 23
"Do you type on the keyboard using the ideal typing method or floating fingers?"
	yes
	no

suggest a poll \| old polls

Socialism

03-03-2004 05:35

anoobis

15,407 posts

Just wanted to know what people thought about socialism. I'll start with my own little lecture.

Now there are many types of socialism, but the one with the most renown and infamy is Marxian socialism. The basis of this principle is the recurrence of class struggle throughout history, which culminates in the victory of the working class over the bourgeoisie, leading to initially a dictatorship, then a steady degradation of government until a purely anarchial and social society is achieved, sort of an equilibrium between chaos and division of power. Personally I find this absurd...firstly, the working class was utterly defeated by the bourgeoisie in a class conflict which never really occurred; it was more of a class conversion. with the industrial revolution, which was supposed to supply the tension and eventual conflict between middle and lower classes, living standards were raised instead of lowered and the working class found greater opportunity to advance its interests instead of being suppressed by the middle and upper classes. So, on that first point socialism was incorrect. On the hybrid of Marxian socialism and certain other doctrines, communism, it found a great trial in the Soviet Union, which really turned out to be a spectacular failure...capitalist nations enjoyed far greater standards of living and equity of opportunity, while the supposedly evil division of wealth was a product of a division of the inherent drive to work and succeed. albeit inheritance can provide a route to undeserving wealth and fame, which is why i say estate taxes should be close to punitive, since no person should be rich because of accident of birth, just as the aristocrats of earlier eras found their influence through accident of birth. equitable division of goods is a very nice dream, but it requires such universal and effective application that it is difficult to foresee such a system being implemented.

your turn!

Showing posts 1-25 of 167

Page 1 of 7

Select page : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 next »

Reactions
03-03-2004 05:45 anoobis
15,407 posts	oh and ally i guess you may want to sticky this, if it's as much a hit as my other political threads are busts...
03-03-2004 05:46 andro
43,215 posts	The ideals of socialism are great, but in practise they don't really work... They kinda rely on humans not being human, if you get my meaning...
03-03-2004 05:47 anoobis
15,407 posts	well, i'm sure if you looked really hard you could find a handful of people who have no desire to gain wealth or profit from their work
03-03-2004 05:51 andro
43,215 posts	There are a few... I'm among them. But we're few and far between - not enough to make it work on a large scale
03-03-2004 05:55 THEMariah
2,083 posts	wow, you talk a lot...lol i didn't read that all b/c i have a short attention span BUT it made me remember that that one book with the pigs....ANIMAL FARM was about socialism...yeah that was a crap book....
03-03-2004 06:00 anoobis
15,407 posts	it was a mockery of stalin's and his communism in the soviet union, and i thought it was a great book
03-03-2004 06:02 THEMariah
2,083 posts	that's because you're a nerd darling , lol, but what can i say i didnt' really read the entire book just enough to pass the test...
03-03-2004 06:04 anoobis
15,407 posts	lol mariah, i may be a nerd but you're....uh....you're a slacker!!! ooh take that
03-03-2004 06:04 THEMariah
2,083 posts	damn straight
03-03-2004 06:10 fishmunky
22,049 posts	i think certain aspects of socialism can work....just look at modern welfare states like canada...free access health care and such
03-03-2004 06:25 daladus
54 posts	The basis of this principle is the recurrence of class struggle throughout history, which culminates in the victory of the working class over the bourgeoisie, leading to initially a dictatorship, then a steady degradation of government until a purely anarchial and social society is achieved, sort of an equilibrium between chaos and division of power This is communism, is it not? Workers of hte world, unite, and such. I, as an anarchist, believe that this is the ideal but I also consider it almost unachieveable. daladus
03-03-2004 06:26 anoobis
15,407 posts	no, that is the essence of marx's teachings on socialist evolution
03-03-2004 06:29 anoobis
15,407 posts	which did have great influence on lenin's approach to communism but it wasn't his idea or anything...in fact i believe marx borrowed the idea from someone else...shoot...let me go look up the name
03-03-2004 06:31 anoobis
15,407 posts	oh it was the german philosopher Georg Hegel who first proposed the dialectical nature of history
03-03-2004 06:42 aussie_celesty
3,484 posts	I think first of all, we need to seperate socialism from communism? They're two VERY different concepts.
03-03-2004 06:49 anoobis
15,407 posts	ok i say we stick to socialism cuz then people go with communism then Communism...cmon people, they're just as different as calories and Calories
03-03-2004 08:32 ModernDayPrayer
371 posts	My thoughts and understanding of Socialism come from the works of Marx and Engels (namely 'The Communist Manifesto'), which I believe to be misunderstood by champions of capitalism. The concept of Socialism is closely related to the concept of Communism. However, the idea of modern-day Communism (ie USSR, China, and Vietnam) is not well looked upon, so I will refer to Marx's original concept of Communisim as Marxism. Please bear with me as I sort through my thoughts: Marxism is the advanced stage of socialism; socialism works to nationalize the means of production such as factories, farms, and transportation. These would then be put under the control of those Marx viewed as the sole producers of the wealth: the proletariat, or working class. Marx believed that political equality and freedom were not achieved without economic equality. *When all nations had developed socialist economies, they would begin to evolve and develop into an international* Marxist society.** The idea of Marxism is very similar to anarchism; a stateless society in which the central government would "wither away." There would be local control of all affairs by completely democratic processes and abolition of the market system (ie no money, no buying, and no selling). The market place would be replaced by a system according to which people would voluntarily work for the common good; "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". Of course Marx and Engels did not believe the world would automatically reach Utopia. People would need to be educated to condition themselves from the "selfish orientation produced by capitalism" and toward the wider perspective that would be necessary to reach marxism. Marx set out to prove that there is no such thing as a "static human nature." We are capable of change; we are merely products of our environment, particularly of the economic system in which we live.
03-03-2004 23:06 anoobis
15,407 posts	Actually it seemed to me that The Communist Manifesto was just a call to action to the proletariat; Capital was the less inflammatory work where Marx put forth his principles on socialism, but yes thank you for extending our little definition of socialism...opinions on it please?
03-03-2004 23:15 rawkerNoNagal
9,981 posts	I loved Animal Farm...and despise socialism.
03-03-2004 23:32 gumby
5,051 posts	I lightly skimmed all the posts, so I know this has already been said in some way or another, but I just can't resist. Socialism (like communism, which itself is an extreme form of socialism) is not at all a bad concept... the human defect is the only thing that prevents a true socialist (or communist) government to work. Damn humans.
04-03-2004 20:55 hipster01cg
337 posts	It's not suprising that Communism or Sociailism doesn't work, humans are less than perfect. The only person I can think off the top of my head who is close to perfect is Jesus or Ghandi. Come to think about it, Jesus in a way was one of the first Socialists, u know, treat everybody equally. The Romans didn't like that. Cat
05-03-2004 18:37 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	Guy's I know I said not to come into political debates anymore, but just for sake of Pete: SOCIALISM IS NOT THE SAME AS COMMUNISM!!!!!!!!!! that's all I had to say!
11-03-2004 05:07 anoobis
15,407 posts	well then...thanks planty...although i thought i made it pretty clear that they weren't the same, although they aren't mutually exclusive either...suffice it to say they're more similar than different
11-03-2004 15:09 hipster01cg
337 posts	Communism is more extreme than Socialism. Socialism is sort of moderate. Cat
11-03-2004 15:38 Masterful_Ally
15,628 posts	I would desribe myself as socialist - infact, I had a massive debate about socialism, capitalism and globaslisation with Dave (Spliffman) on msn last night which was very interesting so lemme know if you want a read, lol. The most popular argument I seem to get when talking about/actively supporting the ideas of socialism is 'oooh, but it's sooo against human nature, how can you be so naive' etc. etc. But if you ask me it actually makes more sense than capitalism. It's true that socialism would be impossible if people were to continue behaving in the selfish, money grabbing ways that we do at the moment, BUT: this behaviour is mainly driven by conditions that don't have to be there, and wouldn't be under socialism - Capitalism creates this kind of of 'dog eat dog behavior'. Our needs are set against others in a kind of 'it's me or them' attitude, and it doesn't have to be that way. You cruel to make it in your career or business,your success is someone else's failure, etc. I just think.... do we really want to live this way? socialism is based on cooperation instead of competition, and no, that doesnt mean it is communism. It removes the fighting attitude that we currently live by. In MEDC's, the majority of us live a comfortable life and don't have to suffer hours and hours of tedious work. In the past, an idea such as socialism would have meant equality would have meant shared misery, hunger, poverty etc, that had been made out of the enslavement and exploitation of others - but it is no longer the case. The current instict we have to harm others to improve our circumstances is not part of human nature - aside from mating rituals, where i nature do you see animals of the same species destorying each other?! It's not natural, its some self-destructive attitude created by capitalism.