What does "socialism" mean to you?
- Thread starter WillJ
- Start date
Narz
keeping it real
Socialism to me means arrogence, it signifies the belief that "the system" knows better than I (or any individual), it implies that humans are sheep in need of a herder, it implies that humans are fundamentally evil and need to be forced to share their toys, it implies lack of choice and goes against fundamental human nature (which is why it doesn't work very well 
).
When the poll shows up I'll choose the choice that best fits in my mind.
- Narz
).When the poll shows up I'll choose the choice that best fits in my mind.
- Narz
newfangle
hates you.
The complete subjugation of the individual mind and body. That is socialism, in all forms.
Sir Len Taft
What? Custom User Title?
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2003
- Messages
- 79
A poll and the answer that you might expect from any mainstream american...that have no clue what socialism really, or how well it works.
Voynich
Letter of Napoleon
State control of the economy; command economy, low economic growth and lessened technological development. Requires removal of many/most/all property rights. The welfare state is actually a somewhat different concept from socialism as it originally was proclaimed to be. Both are ineffective and combining them is a great way to ruin an economy.
Narz said:Socialism to me means arrogence, it signifies the belief that "the system" knows better than I (or any individual), it implies that humans are sheep in need of a herder, it implies that humans are fundamentally evil and need to be forced to share their toys, it implies lack of choice and goes against fundamental human nature (which is why it doesn't work very well
Couldn't have said better myself!
Halcyon
9000
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2004
- Messages
- 930
One word: Bees. Well, except with more dancing and less honey, and no queen, and more drones. Okay, fifteen words.
Socialism is a philosophy which extols the merits of having the economy controlled (to a greater or lesser extent) by a centralised government, allegedly for the common good. Extreme socialism verges on denial of individual merit, while milder socialism is merely a victory of emotion over callous old reason, which doesn't think of the children quite so often or loudly. It's not quite communism, though they're kin. The principle difference is still one of scale.
Socialism is a philosophy which extols the merits of having the economy controlled (to a greater or lesser extent) by a centralised government, allegedly for the common good. Extreme socialism verges on denial of individual merit, while milder socialism is merely a victory of emotion over callous old reason, which doesn't think of the children quite so often or loudly. It's not quite communism, though they're kin. The principle difference is still one of scale.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
To me socialism means 'macho despotism'.
Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Imin - and a myriad other tyrannies.
What do they all have in common?
Socialist sentiment.
Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Imin - and a myriad other tyrannies.
What do they all have in common?
Socialist sentiment.
newfangle
hates you.
WS78 said:
Ha! When those who proclaim the ideology of statism get backed into a corner, they claim superiority!
You want to offer your viewpoint? Fine. But don't evade it, and then insult our intelligence.
Sir Len Taft
What? Custom User Title?
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2003
- Messages
- 79
CurtSibling said:
Socialist sentiment? You're kidding me, right?
This is the wrong side of communism. Left and right doesn't make a line, it's all a circle and those you mention are left facisms. Saddam? How the f*ck can you connect him with socialism?
I will, tomorrow. It's 02.05 and I really need to get to bed, I can't give you the answer you shall have yet.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Sir Len Taft said:
Go and read some history please.
And watch your foul language, too.
I will start you off with some hard facts.
Hitler was a national socialist (NSDAP), Saddam headed a socialist government (Baath).
In fact you will find all of the despots I listed are socialist/left.
Do some googling, you'll see.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Socialism is a political leaning where you consider that the persons forming the nation are actually (and surprisingly, as it seems) an important part of society and shouldn't be crushed by an inhumane system of "the stronger takes all, the others die".
The point is that humans aren't ready for socialism as a government type. Time and time again, humans raped the socialist ideal for personal gain and power.
IMO socialism and it's offspring communism are far-fetched and not suitable for human civilisation as it is today.
Socialism is not the enemy or evil. The people who abuse it are.
Socialism is an ideal and that's going to stay that way until man changes it's own nature.
IMO socialism and it's offspring communism are far-fetched and not suitable for human civilisation as it is today.
Socialism is not the enemy or evil. The people who abuse it are.
Socialism is an ideal and that's going to stay that way until man changes it's own nature.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
Socialism is a political model which centres around the notion "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need". Like a passage from a holy book this is interpreted in many different ways, but it forms a part of every government, from the old Soviet Union to the United States of America.
Milder interpretations of socialism, such as those common in Europe, have hardly failed, nor have they been abused by the "tyranical" rulers that the people dared to elect. In these systems socialism acts as a moderating influence on the free market to ensure that nobody is left behind. Soceity takes care of its poor instead of leaving them to starve, and education and healthcare are seen as services that the state has a duty to provide.
Extreme interpretations of socialism (e.g. the Soviets, Maoist China etc.) are doomed to failure, since so much personal freedom is lost. They are also more prone to abuse and corruption. It's important to point out that socialism as an economic system is quite seperate from the dictatorial forms of government employed by these nations.
For these reasons I find it impossible to praise or denounce socialism, since it encompasses various different schools of thought, from tyranical stalinists to moderate social democrats. This is also true of capitalism, which I support in a moderate regulated form, but which horrifies me in its extreme unregulated form. All in all I'm in favour of moderation, and opposed to extremism, and all this left vs right, commie vs capitalist rubbish drives me mad.
Milder interpretations of socialism, such as those common in Europe, have hardly failed, nor have they been abused by the "tyranical" rulers that the people dared to elect. In these systems socialism acts as a moderating influence on the free market to ensure that nobody is left behind. Soceity takes care of its poor instead of leaving them to starve, and education and healthcare are seen as services that the state has a duty to provide.
Extreme interpretations of socialism (e.g. the Soviets, Maoist China etc.) are doomed to failure, since so much personal freedom is lost. They are also more prone to abuse and corruption. It's important to point out that socialism as an economic system is quite seperate from the dictatorial forms of government employed by these nations.
For these reasons I find it impossible to praise or denounce socialism, since it encompasses various different schools of thought, from tyranical stalinists to moderate social democrats. This is also true of capitalism, which I support in a moderate regulated form, but which horrifies me in its extreme unregulated form. All in all I'm in favour of moderation, and opposed to extremism, and all this left vs right, commie vs capitalist rubbish drives me mad.
insurgent
Exhausted
Sir Len Taft said:
You're way off.
Mise
isle of lucy
Socialist governments act in the best interest of the weakest, the poorest, and the most needy members of the society. Socialists believe that a truely strong man can survive the encumberances of government taxes and intervention, but a weak man struggles to survive without them. Socialists believe above all in equality of opportunity, regardless of social background.
This is my interpretation of socialism in the broader sense. The application of it varies, from Communism to centre-left Europe.
This is my interpretation of socialism in the broader sense. The application of it varies, from Communism to centre-left Europe.
nonconformist
Miserable
None of the above.
Hitler callled his party the National Sozialist Deutsch Arbeiter Pertei, but he abused the word. For example, is the democratic republic of Congo democratic?CurtSibling said:
