Politics/Religion | Socialism

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

Poll for November 24
"Do you prefer music raw and uncut or do you like it edited?"
	raw and uncut
	edited

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 126-150 of 167

Page 6 of 7

Select page : « previous 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 next »

Reactions
22-11-2004 10:23 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	well, from what I know, and that's a lot, believe me, hehe, that from the first signs of pre-humans that live in a group, there have ALWAYS been leaders in those groups, a leader, means rules, mean no anarchy. the experiments I'm talking about are 19th century, and they're the only documented forms of anarchy, so what ever you say, is never being re-searched. i'm an academic, with me no re-search means no official scientific reseach, means no info about it... my professors are not wrong, and with all respet, but saying a professor is wrong...well...that's not done...
22-11-2004 10:25 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	BTW, isn't this topic about scocialims? My sceduele I gave was how socialism evolved, not anarchy, and yes, the 19th century anarchistic groupings evolved from communism...that is the truth...
03-12-2004 20:51 alexalexalex
2,064 posts	spain is socialist!
09-01-2005 05:39 DolphinStarr
2,356 posts	socialism as in a governemtn that looks after everyone and doesn't leave those who are poor out to hang is all fine and good and there are some stellar examples of that. Socialism as in marxism doesn't work. Communism has consistently failed. Yes i know there are countries which are still officially communist however the title of dictatorship would be more apt. Communism as described by marxist lenninist ideology has failed to materialize
09-01-2005 17:57 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	but how can sociamism not work? do all the peopel who claim that have any idea hw a socialist state works? look at the scandinavian countries, they're all socialistic! they don't fail!
11-02-2005 04:49 CreatedKritter
138 posts	Of course not, you just pay taxes out the bungholio, and there is no motivation to work...everything's paid for. It's supposed to be stewardship of property...you take care of yourself, you reap what you so....you don't reap what others sow.
11-02-2005 04:52 CreatedKritter
138 posts	Simplistic I know....but I'm all typed out.
13-02-2005 05:29 DolphinStarr
2,356 posts	lol the idea should be to tax so that peopel still have some left so they still have some incentive to work. It can also be argued that peopel will work and pay the taxes as insurance against anything happening to them cause that way they know the state will be there if they fall down. The netherlands do seem to make it work very well. Also consider the culture that you're raised in, cause most of the people on here soundlike they grew up in the western independent culture where the idea is to get as much for yourself as you can, whereas if you grew up in a more collectivist culture you'd have a different outlook, and maybe the idea of working for others wouldn't sit so badly on some of your shoulders.
13-02-2005 12:24 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	The netherlands do seem to make it work very well. the Netherlands aren't more socialistic then Belgium, you know...
13-02-2005 23:39 CreatedKritter
138 posts	My main problem is that socialism lies down the murky road to communism. And, working for the common good was tried in America..til people realized it didn't work. Puritans, I know, started with a common storehouse, and you would take what you need and put in what you produced. The only problem was that people are lazy, so more people were taking out than were farming, because part of the common good would become slackers, hoping the rest would work so they didn't have to. Jamestown had the same thing, until John Smith said, if you don't work, you don't eat.
14-02-2005 10:22 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	it only doesn't work cause people are so darn selfish!!! not all socialism has to end up in communism, there's a huge gap between the two!
16-02-2005 02:09 CreatedKritter
138 posts	Wait, I said it's on the way to communism...not the same thing. Communism says no government...communists just look at socialism as a necessary evil to get to communism. Socialism uses the assumption that man is innately good....one of the many problems.
16-02-2005 09:29 Plantagenet
12,864 posts	yeah, ok, but I don't get why ppl always have to associate socialism with communism...
17-02-2005 00:21 CreatedKritter
138 posts	It's close to communism, that's why. Yes, there is at least one fundamental difference-communism calls for no government at all, leading to anarchy-but many beliefs and practices are close.
22-03-2005 04:01 italianguy
82 posts	I am a strong supporter of socialism: not only is it fundamentally a good ideal, but it is also one of the few ideals that can be put into practice successfully. Most European countries adopt certain aspects of socialism (i.e public health care, statalized utilities and services), and socialist economies have worked: consider Cuba, one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere, a barren land with no great natural resources, which cannot trade with the outside world because of the unlawful US embargo. In spite of all these disadvantages, its inhabitants enjoy excellent healthcare (Cuban doctors are renowned for their skills), and starvation is not a problem, as everyone receives at least sufficient rations to thrive every day, while scores of people died every year of poor nutrition when Batista was in power. I'm not supporting Castro's abolition of rights and persecution of political enemies, I'm just pointing out that socialism can improve a country. When it comes to communism, however, I'm more skeptical: human nature stands in the way of an anarchic, social society. But, as Marx pointed out, as the distrust capitalism causes fades away, when, as Rousseau said, the dream of property and wealth will stop corrupting man, such a society might appear. It may take centuries, millennia, it may even never happen, but i think its something worth striving for.
22-03-2005 04:05 italianguy
82 posts	Yo Plantagenet, u da man
22-03-2005 04:11 Playmate01
3,893 posts	you used so many big words
29-04-2005 15:55 hipster01cg
337 posts	I think im a sort liberal, scottish nationalist. Does that make sense. So right now im stuck in between SNP and Liberal.
13-07-2005 22:59 eighteen_vision
132 posts	socialism rules america should try it!!
13-10-2005 00:05 DirtyHarry3801
159 posts	In my opinion Communism is a great concept and the reason it hasn't worked in the past is as everyone is saying because of humans. But i think Karl Marx was a revolutionary with insite beyond what anyone has come to realise. A society where everyone shares wealth is hard to form today because of how far we have come. If it was still the middle ages for example it could work where everyone works for different things then everoyone shares the fruits of their labour with everyone else. Therefore everyone is working for themselves and everyone else. It's almost a blissful ideal where a whole community can live in peace and harmony (at the risk of sounding like a fuckin fruit). The most amazing thing about Marx' ideals however are his Atheist theories in a time before Atheism even existed. The way he had seen that religion in a whole is a complete farce is astonishing. Today more people are realising how correct he was. You need only look in the bible to understand how religion oppresses the working class and not only that it oppresses women too. Besides the fact that the idea of a magical guy in the sky that sees everything we do is more than slightly insane. The only reason that today communism doesn't really exist today is because of events like the Vietnam war. People just don't seem to understand the ideals or know how to make them work. Then theres states such as the USA which is scared of communism because of their capitalist ideals. The day a Liberal Socialist order came into power in every country in the world, much like that of the Netherlands, will be a great day. Myabe one day we could all be happy, work during the day in a happy atmosphere then kick back and smoke some chronic in the evening, like Bob Marley once said "One Love".
09-12-2005 16:29 YouDaoud
3 posts	For all those who say communism is not the same as socialism: Socialism appeared before Marx, but was a utopian socialism. In the nineteenth century, Marx and Engels developped a theory of scientifical socialism as opposed to the utopian, they weren't content of imagining the ideal society, they fixed the way necessary to reach that society. Their theory became known as marxism. Until 1917, socialists were all marxists. In 1917, a scission occured. Socialists were divided: moderates who called themselves social-democrats, and revolutionnaries who were called communists. That distinction is still true today. When you say socialism, it can mean communism or social-democracy. Although some parties are sometimes called socialists and it's understood that they are social-democrats (eg: the french socialist party). Even social-democrats used to be marxists but interpreted marxism differently, saying a revolution is not necessary. But, today, social- democratic parties are no more marxist, at least for the majority of their members.
09-12-2005 16:52 YouDaoud
3 posts	I object to the idea that communism failed because of the nature of humans. You're all refering to a level in the evolution of society according to the marxist theory that wasn't even achieved. The idea of the suppression of state and the total abolition of classes is only realised after a long process of evolution of society. The USSR didn't even pass 20% of that process. I think the main reason of the failure of communist regimes in the twentieth century is the lack of democracy. According to Marx and even Lenin, socialism after the revolution should be a lot more democratic that parliamentary democracy. But that wasn't the case at all in the USSR, China, Cuba, North Korea or any of these authoritarian regimes. They evolved into dictatorships and there was no control on the governors. Those who were supposed to work for the people's interests worked for their own. Therefore, communist regimes were a lot similar to fascist Italy or nazi Germany. Another reason: communist revolutions were supposed to take place in developped countries where capitalism had evoloved and became contradictory to the necessities of society. But they took place instead in agricultural countries such as Russia or China (that were not industrial at all at the time of the revolutions). Therefore, while these revolutions were supposed to oppose a developped class of workers to the bourgeoisie, it opposed farmers and fractions of workers to the aristocracy. They were artificial communist revolutions. If these revolutions had taken place in the european developped countries and established democracy there, would communism have succeeded? I don't know.
09-12-2005 16:57 YouDaoud
3 posts	Communism and social-democracy have the same goals, but they differ in how to establish these goals. They both want abolition of classes and anarchy at the end. But communists think that a revolution is needed then a dictatorship of proletariat while social-democrats believe in reforms by socialist laws and parliamentary action.
22-02-2006 21:05 kingofmyhead
101 posts	People are afraid of a socialistic society. When this term is mentioned, people's minds immediately fly to failures or dictatorships, Cuba in particular. People are afraid to try anything with the risk of that happening. Now, if it were 1700's America, I would be a Hamiltonian as opposed to being a Jeffersonian. Jeffersonians believed in the good of people, whereas Hamiltonians believed that humans are motivated by greed. Therefore, I feel that although some people are selfless, the majority aren't, and would not be willing to suffer and work for someone else's benefit.
22-02-2006 21:08 kingofmyhead
101 posts	And if my last comment was critical, I have been raised in Western society, and I have never experienced some of the Scandinavian countries, or their socialistic success.

Select page : « previous 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 next »

Quick reply (click here* for the advanced reply form)*

HOME

ARTISTS

SOUNDTRACKS

FORUM

CHATROOM

MEMBERS

POLL

LINKS

HELP

MY LETSSINGIT

Forum / Politics/Religion / Socialism

Socialism