Is Socialism really that bad?

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
User avatar
-1-
Posts: 879
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by -1- » July 27th, 2017, 3:02 am

Burning ghost wrote:LuckyR -

Can either exist without the other?
I assume you mean "capitalism" and "socialism" as "one" and "another".

Capitalism is an economic system. Socialism has several, sometimes overlapping meanings:

1. an economic system, often characterized by having the means of production in the hands of the collective, by central plans of managing resources, and by marching up-and-down on May 1st, singing the Internationale, and screaming slogans.
2. an altruistic system.
3. a feature of any economic system that tends or strives to equalize income by redistributing wealth and/or benefits of wealth from those who have very much to those who have very little.

As such, capitalism and socialism can't coexist under the meaning 1. of socialism, but the two can easily and nicely coexist under 2. and 3. meaning of socialismus.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

Burning ghost
Posts: 2658
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Burning ghost » July 27th, 2017, 10:19 am

They are essentially "economic models" for society. An element of one will exist in the other always regardless of the rules set in place by whatever "authority"/"political body".

Here a nice little point by Zizek :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXh5Zbep3Ig
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
Socrateaze
Posts: 132
Joined: July 25th, 2017, 8:07 am
Favorite Philosopher: George Carlin

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Socrateaze » July 27th, 2017, 3:50 pm

Alchemist1984 wrote:In short, yes a socialistic government is very dangerous it’s citizens. Once a group of individuals gives too much power and trust into their government, corruption starts to occur and the government becomes too powerful over their citizens. Since the beginning of civilizations we have seen this happen, where the ruler is given too much power and respect where the system revolves around him. But not until the 18th century is when people have started to realize this divine right they worship their rulers with is destroying their economy, society, and of course their natural rights. This philosophical movement of the 18th century helped fuel the American Revolution, French Revolution, and influenced many monarchies to become constitutional monarchies. Even though this has changed most of the first world countries into democracies or flawed democracies, there are still many examples in the last 100 years of the rights of citizens being taken away by their government. Some extreme examples are Nazi Germany, North Korea, and Communist Russia. These examples show clearly how a powerful and trusted central government can become disastrous quickly. Nations like these not only affect their citizens but cause major issues around the world.

As time progresses, less monarchies/dictatorships are established and are replaced by democracies. This is very beneficial to the people in the reign, but sooner or later, the middle/lower class become frustrated over their lack of representation or become envious of the upper class’s success and feel that their government is rigged towards providing to the upper class(which is mostly the case). All of this is just natural human behavior and thoughts, when someone does nothing more than you did and achieves greater success(mainly addressing wealth inequality). This causes the middle/lower class to want to reform the government into a socialism or something comparable to a socialism, where everyone is treated “equally”. Of course not all socialisms are created that way, some are created out the greed of rulers. Which whom want to deceive their citizens into thinking they will be treated fairly and equally.

From the philosophical point of view, socialism has it’s pros and cons. Idealistically through a socialistic government, everyone is treated equally and given the amount of money everyone thinks their occupation deserves. This allows for no envy since everyone is given the same opportunities through their government’s programs. But since everyone is created and given everything the same as everyone else, this allows for no creative work and little progress in a society. If one doctor is more trained and more professional than the other, they deserve more pay for the service, but in a socialism this is not the case, which prevents anybody from being progressive and creative since it will not have any added benefits.

From a statistical point of view, socialism is terrible in the long run (3+ years), ruining economies and businesses all throughout the country. Let’s take Venezuela for example; for over fifteen years Venezuela has been a socialistic society, which seemed to have great benefits at first. In the first three years, unemployment went down and income and spending increased which boosted their economy. This is mostly due to the fact that before the ”socialist revolution”, Venezuela was one of the wealthiest countries in South America, allowing more money to be put into the government at the beginning of the reformed government. But after fifteen years and many elections, their economy has grown to be the worst in the world, and it has come to the point where there is no more food or toilet paper left on the shelves. Major companies have left Venezuela, such as Coca-Cola, and the unemployment rate is one of the highest in the world. There are many more examples of socialism failing economically, such as Greece, Cuba, and many many more.

Socialism overall allows for no growth and little variation in the market and society. Putting too much power into a centralized government is an open gateway for corruption and an economic disaster. Hopefully in the next few years, Venezuela and countries alike will look around them and see how they should take a stand and change their government into a fair and justice system.

Comment and start a discussion if below you agree or disagree with me
I agree with this, since it is neither about fairness, nor justice, but survival of the fittest. The OP gives its own answer in the word, socialism. We are a social animal, but it often works to our own detriment. Nature does not follow an extreme social path even in its most social of animals. A balanced capitalism is the better call.

However, we may be fooling ourselves in thinking that we have a better say in democracy or in any government that seems more diplomatic or tolerant ... they still to a great extent do as they please.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 879
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by -1- » July 27th, 2017, 10:34 pm

Socrateaze wrote: I agree with this, since it is neither about fairness, nor justice, but survival of the fittest.
I agree that it's about the survival of the fittest. My only addition is that socialism raises the "fitness" to survive for more individuals. I put "fitness" in brackets because I meant that the fitness is only relatively raised, that is, the environment has been altered, not the individuals' ability to survive in different terrain.

That is, socialism creates an environment in which more individuals survive than in a climate of no socialism.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.

User avatar
Socrateaze
Posts: 132
Joined: July 25th, 2017, 8:07 am
Favorite Philosopher: George Carlin

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Socrateaze » July 28th, 2017, 1:30 am

-1- wrote:
Socrateaze wrote: I agree with this, since it is neither about fairness, nor justice, but survival of the fittest.
I agree that it's about the survival of the fittest. My only addition is that socialism raises the "fitness" to survive for more individuals. I put "fitness" in brackets because I meant that the fitness is only relatively raised, that is, the environment has been altered, not the individuals' ability to survive in different terrain.

That is, socialism creates an environment in which more individuals survive than in a climate of no socialism.
I see what you mean here, that's why I mentioned a balanced capitalism. After all, a healthy capitalism with humanitarian objectives provides a balanced health care and educational system. But in places where only the minority pay taxes and have to support the masses, socialism can't work and democracies are detrimental.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3030
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by LuckyR » July 28th, 2017, 3:29 am

Burning ghost wrote:LuckyR -

Can either exist without the other? I really see them both as being explicit features of economics that will remain as long as economics remains. When a huge change comes (if ever) then we will perhaps have to put the whole idea of "economics" to sleep. I should add that kind of "thing" would replace such an obviously important social structure is completely beyond me though!?!?
In theory, yes. In practice, no. The varying ratios of this socialistic capitalism are labeled as right and left, and small individual policies can turn millionaires into billionaires, but the big picture issues are more similar than different.
"As usual... it depends."

Burning ghost
Posts: 2658
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Burning ghost » July 28th, 2017, 4:25 am

AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
Ranvier
Posts: 538
Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
Location: USA

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Ranvier » August 4th, 2017, 4:14 am

I believe that there is always a solution to any problem and myriad of proposals can emerge once we know what we want. The fundamental question becomes: What is it that we want?
- Do we value rights of an individual or the rights of the many, society.
- Do we want to promote individuality or equality.
- Do we want efficiency (Fascism), power (Capitalism), compassion (Socialism), freedom (Anarchy)

There are simple facts that people often forget. 1. Any system, political or economic, that retains power for an extended period of time will eventually become pathologically corrupt from original ideal. Not because people are inherently "evil" but because in order to maintain power, people must invent mechanisms to prevent others in becoming a threat to that hegemony of power. 2. The true power ALWAYS resides with the "mob", the "populace". We actively or passively condone what is being done to us, with no one else to blame but ourselves. That's true throughout the history of mankind, after all pyramids would never had been build by generations of tens of thousands of slaves without acquiescence to few thousand soldiers with spears and whips. 3. Any system will render some group of people disenfranchised in lack of adequate representation. Therefore, again it's a question of what do we want and how to best achieve that goal. Socialism certainly is not the answer.

User avatar
Jan Pahl
Posts: 20
Joined: September 6th, 2017, 3:22 pm

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Jan Pahl » September 7th, 2017, 4:51 pm

Excellent post indeed alchemist. I am from Venezuela and you summarised very well the Socialist situation, In fact all Socialism (marxism, cultural marxism, socialism, national socialism) its even worst, but the "magic reality" that those people belonging to a philosophy that behaves has religion in theory & practice produce in the real world (in all the anthropological sense of the word Religion), can´t be expressed in credible words, for me is impossible to make people believe what was living in Nazi Germany, Communist Germany, Venezuelan Marxism or Chilean Allende times, Italian Mussolini dictatorship and the Communist partisan aggression in post II war Sicily . I now that because my family is from all those places (Germany, Holland and Italy) , I am Venezuelan by "Ius solis", and part of my family married people from Chile that saw Allende times.

Burning ghost
Posts: 2658
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Burning ghost » September 9th, 2017, 1:35 am

Jan Pahl wrote:Excellent post indeed alchemist. I am from Venezuela and you summarised very well the Socialist situation, In fact all Socialism (marxism, cultural marxism, socialism, national socialism) its even worst, but the "magic reality" that those people belonging to a philosophy that behaves has religion in theory & practice produce in the real world (in all the anthropological sense of the word Religion), can´t be expressed in credible words, for me is impossible to make people believe what was living in Nazi Germany, Communist Germany, Venezuelan Marxism or Chilean Allende times, Italian Mussolini dictatorship and the Communist partisan aggression in post II war Sicily . I now that because my family is from all those places (Germany, Holland and Italy) , I am Venezuelan by "Ius solis", and part of my family married people from Chile that saw Allende times.
I would be very interested to hear more from you. A very sorry story for Venezuela, a history of problems over there that have become a tangled mess of internal conflict and external interference. Hope things work out over there soon.

Are you there now? So hard to discern much from afar so I'd be interested to here what information you have to offer us.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
Jan Pahl
Posts: 20
Joined: September 6th, 2017, 3:22 pm

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Jan Pahl » September 9th, 2017, 12:28 pm

Thanks a lot Burning ghost but I prefer not to talk about the overdose of the everyday stupid part of philosophy that turns the world a nightmare for the people that actually make a "living" in marxist countries wile they acts like Sartre, Marcuse, Saramago or Chomsky talking about a "socialist paradise" in cocktails at Santa Monica Beautiful Beach house making look at market economy and human individual rights like alienation and anomie with a "causal" relationship in "bourgeoisie western culture" in all its aspects. I simply hate those social misfits that still have their mind in 1848

In a moth I will leave my house and all at venezuela, thanks to God I have family in Europe and the Venezuelan Quarter that I had here are not any longer in this hell

User avatar
Ranvier
Posts: 538
Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
Location: USA

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Ranvier » September 9th, 2017, 3:24 pm

I concur, your "first hand" account would be valuable Jan Paul.

Steve3007
Posts: 5408
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes
Location: UK

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Steve3007 » September 18th, 2017, 9:53 am

Jan Pahl:
Thanks a lot Burning ghost but I prefer not to talk about the overdose of the everyday stupid part of philosophy that turns the world a nightmare for the people that actually make a "living" in marxist countries wile they acts like Sartre, Marcuse, Saramago or Chomsky talking about a "socialist paradise" in cocktails at Santa Monica Beautiful Beach house making look at market economy and human individual rights like alienation and anomie with a "causal" relationship in "bourgeoisie western culture" in all its aspects. I simply hate those social misfits that still have their mind in 1848
I guess remote Utopian dreams tend to attract naive romantics? Like many members of the International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War.

George Bernard Shaw's continued romanticising of Stalin's Soviet Union is also interesting, I think.

telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1433323/How ... lings.html

Burning ghost
Posts: 2658
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Burning ghost » September 21st, 2017, 2:47 am

I think we can all agree that socialism works on some levels (that is why we pay taxes, or have national rail, armed forces or power grids). I doubt we'd be happy about people raising private armies!

I would find it very interesting to here what people think about certain areas where socialism, combined government ownerships, causes society to fray around the edges. Let us assume first of all that the governors of these aspects are reasonably capable and see what is most likely to lead to social discord.

First off I am sure we can all agree that a nation requires an armed force for use in times of crisis. When it comes to property ownership I am guessing we'd all pretty much agree that people should be allowed, and encouraged, to own their own property. In the work place we see in every country certain rules which are founded on social principles, such as minimum wage, and workers rights.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
Ranvier
Posts: 538
Joined: February 12th, 2017, 1:47 pm
Location: USA

Re: Is Socialism really that bad?

Post by Ranvier » September 21st, 2017, 4:21 am

Burning ghost

This is an interesting perspective on socialism, the need for armed forces to protect property, or taxes to maintain the common social property (national rail system). I suppose it depends on the definition of Socialism.

Yesterday, I was watching a YouTube video of the earthquake that occurred South of Puebla in Mexico on Sep. 19th. The video was captured from a hand held camera depicting moments before the earthquake, as well as the event itself, followed by the collapse of one of the buildings. People were naturally terrified in consternation but within minutes there were hundreds of people removing derbies off the collapsed building in the search for survivors. Amazing to see the level of cooperation before any emergency services arrived to the scene. That is socialism at work that stems from the natural human benevolence. However, such socialism only "works" in the moments of crisis but not as a political system. Socialism can't be imposed on people in taxes but come from the will of individuals to cooperate. We are still victims of our history and maxims carried from the past "habits", including the justification for war or the military. I think that in the 21at century, it's time for a new ideology based on the maturity of the human consciousness.

Post Reply