First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Socialism
6268 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
Posted 9/27/10
What is Socialism in your eyes?
What makes someone or something a socialist/socialism?

What is your opinion on socialism?

Lately I've seen alot of people (also politicians) who used the word socialism like it was something evil, something inferior.
While in my History classes I learned that the socialist movements where the ones who improved the lifes of many many factury workers, infact they became great political partys because so many supported them and what they did.
When did this become bad?
When did it become bad to take care of your fellow human being?
75430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10 , edited 9/27/10
Well partially it's due to two things.

1) the small step between socialism and Communism. and the bad rep that communist dictatorships (there seems to be no other kind of communism in actual practice) have for actually living up to their ideals. From Marx's ideal that "the state shall wither away" we instead get Stalin equating the people with the state and the state with himself. This more more like Louis XIV's attitude "L'etate c'est moi"

2) the failure of unions and other pro-socialist movements to demonstrate pragmatic results. Most people even in my moderately socialist country view unions as a necessary evil, tolerated for their historical gains in worker's rights, but now considered parasites on both workers and the GDP. They have become political entities buying the votes of their members by doing their best to turn union jobs into sinecures and ignoring the plight of non-union people who slave away doing the real work for much less pay. they are yet another agency by which many ignorant or stupid people believe they can 'vote themselves rich'. This discredits them and socialist movements in general even for those who might otherwise consider themselves socialists.

At least that's my theory.

( BTW. it's buried under one liners but I responded to your post on terrorism too. and there's an ancilliary post in Popcornpuff's post about America as terrorists that I wrote that you might find interesting. I resent that I have to point these things out to people. ED should be about seeking out other worthwhile posts. not making one liners and only responding to counter posts that quote you.)
Posted 9/27/10
We have Karl Marx's communism and Hitler's National Socialism to chose from. I see both as being absurd, since people are worth their weight in gold if they deserve to be, no matter what the race, religion, creed, or anything else.
75430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10 , edited 9/27/10

Northerner wrote:

We have Karl Marx's communism and Hitler's National Socialism to chose from. I see both as being absurd, since people are worth their weight in gold if they deserve to be, no matter what the race, religion, creed, or anything else.


The Nationalist Socialist German Worker's party was so called as a populist move to compete for the same pool of voters and activist that the communists were rapidly attracting in the anarchy that was the Weimar republic's dying days.

In point of fact it was an arch-conservative organisation, with social Darwinist and racialist ideals. A near worship of violence and the military as means to multiple ends and a general series of philosophical cornerstones that made it more in line with the fascist parties of Italy and Spain and the Right Wing government of 30's imperial Japan. They courted both sides of the worker/capitalist divide while reaching for power and thoroughly betrayed and murdered their own socialist membership in 1936. The captains of industry got a much better deal from the Nazis. Further, the Nuremburg trials did not even hold those industrialists responsible for what the Nazis did with those industries during the war.

Don't the word let 'socialist' in their name fool you to thinking they were anything other than hardcore right wing.


Posted 9/27/10

papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Northerner wrote:

We have Karl Marx's communism and Hitler's National Socialism to chose from. I see both as being absurd, since people are worth their weight in gold if they deserve to be, no matter what the race, religion, creed, or anything else.


The Nationalist Socialist German Worker's party was so called as a populist move to compete for the same pool of voters and activist that the communists were rapidly attracting in the anarchy that was the Weimar republic's dying days.

In point of fact it was an arch-conservative organisation, with social Darwinist and racialist ideals. A near worship of violence and the military as means to multiple ends and a general series of philosophical cornerstones that made it more in line with the fascist parties of Italy and Spain and the Right Wing government of 30's imperial Japan. They courted both sides of the worker/capitalist divide while reaching for power and thoroughly betrayed and murdered their own socialist membership in 1936. The captains of industry got a much better deal from the Nazis. Further, the Nuremburg trials did not even hold those industrialists responsible for what the Nazis did with those industries during the war.

Don't the word 'socialist' in their name fool you to thinking they were anything other than hardcore right wing.




Hardcore without a doubt. Their intentions weren't exactly ''evil'' just geared towards the greater 'stability' for their own peoples, yet harshly enforced. Some would say that Mussolini's Italy was the precursor to communism, in a sense. There will never be a perfect system, no matter how extreme a method there is put in place to make anyone follow it.
75430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10

Northerner wrote:

[
Hardcore without a doubt. Their intentions weren't exactly ''evil'' just geared towards the greater 'stability' for their own peoples, yet harshly enforced. Some would say that Mussolini's Italy was the precursor to communism, in a sense. There will never be a perfect system, no matter how extreme a method there is put in place to make anyone follow it.


I find shoveling people into ovens with industrial efficiency pretty evil. And I'm sure there's plenty of people who'd argue fascism in general is an evil approach to politics.


Which I again. I have to disagree with you. I'm not saying Communism was good but there's no way Italian fascism could have been it's precursor in either an ideological or Temporal sense.

Marx and Engels wrote Das Kapital in 1867.

Lenin was smuggled into Russia in a sealed railway car like a bio-weapon during the middle of World War I. Just before the Russian Revolution of 1917.

The Italian Fascist Party (PNF) wasn't formed until 1921.

The aims of Fascism and Communism as written ideals are diametrically opposed.

I will conceed this much.

I don't see much real world difference between a right wing or left wing dictatorship. But I have to disagree that Fascism and Communism are in anyway anything other than in opposition to each other as Ideologies.

2319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / where the grass i...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10
i'm in a socialist country now. The only rich here is the government. If they found out about this post, they might put me in jail.
Posted 9/27/10

alupihan45 wrote:

i'm in a socialist country now. The only rich here is the government. If they found out about this post, they might put me in jail.
That's totalitarianism via dictatorship, while using socialism only as a front. Not a liberalism socialist country like Canada.
Posted 9/27/10 , edited 9/27/10

papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Northerner wrote:

[
Hardcore without a doubt. Their intentions weren't exactly ''evil'' just geared towards the greater 'stability' for their own peoples, yet harshly enforced. Some would say that Mussolini's Italy was the precursor to communism, in a sense. There will never be a perfect system, no matter how extreme a method there is put in place to make anyone follow it.


I find shoveling people into ovens with industrial efficiency pretty evil. And I'm sure there's plenty of people who'd argue fascism in general is an evil approach to politics.


Which I again. I have to disagree with you. I'm not saying Communism was good but there's no way Italian fascism could have been it's precursor in either an ideological or Temporal sense.

Marx and Engels wrote Das Kapital in 1867.

Lenin was smuggled into Russia in a sealed railway car like a bio-weapon during the middle of World War I. Just before the Russian Revolution of 1917.

The Italian Fascist Party (PNF) wasn't formed until 1921.

The aims of Fascism and Communism as written ideals are diametrically opposed.

I will conceed this much.

I don't see much real world difference between a right wing or left wing dictatorship. But I have to disagree that Fascism and Communism are in anyway anything other than in opposition to each other as Ideologies.



Yet we have seen many good and highly disciplined people on the Nazi German side, they just fought for the wrong cause. Scapegoating other people for one's own inadequacies counts for so much of the bollocks we see today. I think the Russians had essentially the right idea, though it proved to sew such misery among the people. When Russia attempted to invade Finland during WWII (The Winter War) the Finns beat the proverbial snot out of the Russians simply because of their morale and use of proper tactics. Finland was outgunned, but not outmatched, so they took the victory plus so much more.

Regardless of the systems people follow, there are always (or should be) some good eggs in every basket.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10

amersfoort wrote:

What is Socialism in your eyes?
What makes someone or something a socialist/socialism?

What is your opinion on socialism?

Lately I've seen a lot of people (also politicians) who used the word socialism like it was something evil, something inferior.
While in my History classes I learned that the socialist movements where the ones who improved the lives of many many factory workers, in fact they became great political parties because so many supported them and what they did.
When did this become bad?
When did it become bad to take care of your fellow human being?


That's not what socialism is

Socialism

~ No private property rights = evil
~ No businesses = evil
~ Planned economy = evil

Also Socialist countries tend to have ultra high unemployment levels, like 10+%,

Its bad for everyone, especially those with jobs since they have to foot the bill for all the people who aren't working.
75430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10

DomFortress wrote:


alupihan45 wrote:

i'm in a socialist country now. The only rich here is the government. If they found out about this post, they might put me in jail.
That's totalitarianism via dictatorship, while using socialism only as a front. Not a liberalism socialist country like Canada.


Actually according to wikipedia I think our system is less socialism than Social Democrat. Of course it's all LeEEEeberaAal and evil in the eyes of Americans.


75430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10

Allhailodin wrote:


amersfoort wrote:

What is Socialism in your eyes?
What makes someone or something a socialist/socialism?

What is your opinion on socialism?

Lately I've seen a lot of people (also politicians) who used the word socialism like it was something evil, something inferior.
While in my History classes I learned that the socialist movements where the ones who improved the lives of many many factory workers, in fact they became great political parties because so many supported them and what they did.
When did this become bad?
When did it become bad to take care of your fellow human being?


That's not what socialism is

~ No private property rights= evil
~ No businesses = evil
~
Planned economy = evil

Also Socialist countries tend to have ultra high
unemploymentlevels, like 10+%,

Its bad for everyone, especially those with jobs since they have to foot the bill for all the people who aren't working.


I have to disagree. Evil is a subjective and over used term. You say evil because you don't like it and it clashes with your belief structure. How is that different from the bible thumping christian who thinks gays, or Wiccans, or Muslims or Darwin are evil?

It's not to your taste? Sure, Fine, Me neither, but really now. Evil? No. Sorry.


10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10

papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


amersfoort wrote:

What is Socialism in your eyes?
What makes someone or something a socialist/socialism?

What is your opinion on socialism?

Lately I've seen a lot of people (also politicians) who used the word socialism like it was something evil, something inferior.
While in my History classes I learned that the socialist movements where the ones who improved the lives of many many factory workers, in fact they became great political parties because so many supported them and what they did.
When did this become bad?
When did it become bad to take care of your fellow human being?


That's not what socialism is

~ No private property rights= evil
~ No businesses = evil
~ Planned economy = evil

Also Socialist countries tend to have ultra high unemploymentlevels, like 10+%,

Its bad for everyone, especially those with jobs since they have to foot the bill for all the people who aren't working.


I have to disagree. Evil is a subjective and over used term. You say evil because you don't like it and it clashes with your belief structure. How is that different from the bible humping christian who thinks gays, or Wiccans, or Muslims or Darwin are evil?

It's not to your taste? Sure, Fine, Me neither, but really now. Evil? No. Sorry.


Fixed.

Alright fine.
5782 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / In Limbo in Silen...
Offline
Posted 9/27/10
The historical role of Karl Marx was that he taught an epistemology in the light of which the discredited idea could be resurrected and made seemingly safe against any attempt at refutation. This Marxian theory consists of three dogmas:

(1) As long as there is no socialism, mankind is divided into social classes the vital interests of which are irremediably opposed to one another.

(2) A man's thinking is necessarily always determined by his class affiliation. His thoughts mirror the special interests of his class, incurably antagonistic to the interests of the members of all other classes.

(3) The conflict of the class interests results in the pitiless class-struggle that unavoidably leads to the victory of the most numerous and most wronged class, the proletariat. Then the everlasting age of socialism dawns.

As this doctrine sees it, there cannot be any peaceful discussion concerning any serious problems between people belonging to different classes. They can never come to an agreement. For the result of their thinking will always be "ideological," i.e., determined by the special interests of their own class. The war between the classes is permanent. It will come to an end only by the radical "liquidation" of all "exploiting classes" and their "sycophants," the wretched peoples who betray their class comrades.
~Ludwig von Mises
6268 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
Posted 9/28/10
Hmm perhaps I made a mistake, I'm not talking about 100% socialism here.
I'm talking about measurements that contain some socialism, like for example health care, I have heard alot of horrible stories from the US about how people cannot afford some health bills and are forced to live without their neccessery treatments (this is probably overexxagerated) however, a part of this must be true.
In my own country, I never heard of such stories, since injured people are brought in the hospital, get treated and are then afterwards presented the bill, but the treatment comes first, and the bills aren't that high because most of the costs are being payed through taxes.

The thing is, whenever a politician in the USA (like Obama) tries to change something towards a more socialistic something, he will be seen as a pure socialist, wich is apparently a very hardcore curse word.

Now about payments for the work you do, In my country the people who earn the most pay alot more taxes, and people who are without a job get money so that they can live towards some standards, ofcourse this might seem unfair and very abuseable, however some people just cannot work due to injuries or things like that. They too deserve to live a comfortable life don't you think?

One of the reasons I'm posting this is this too:
In my vacation I was working at a great storage facilitie, here I worked with adults who earned very litlle, however every day they worked untill the had sweat all over their bodys, in other words they worked really hard.
Then I thought by myself, a CEO of a huge company probably works just as hard as these people, but why does he earn so much more?
Ofcourse there should be a difference, that CEO probably did alot to reach his/her current point, and should desereve a good paycheck, but do the people who work untill their back hurts not deserve a good paycheck? I believe they do.

In my eyes, socialism spreads the wealth over a entire nation, so that everyone can live a comfortable life, wich in my eyes almost everyone deserves.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.