Let’s Talk About Socialism

Brokered convention coming up. Fireworks galore. Thanks to all the Republicans in Nevada who came out to vote for Bernie today.

 

I am glad you guys got such a great sense of humor. Not a one of these memes portray Democratic Socialism. But then you know that, it is much more fun to misconstrue and watch the jackals going after the meat
I believe that most of you are intelligent. Why you find it impossible to make the distinction between Socialism and socialism is beyond me. Intentional stupidity? I don't know?
Every single one of you know that absolutely no one is going after Marxist style Socialism.

 

Looking around the world Pete, i do suppose there are varying degrees of socialism but the one singular factor involved is the fact that the citizenry has to cede certain rights and / or affairs to the government.
I could go into a long diatribe explaining all the variations but here’s the glitch with all of it: Have you known of ANY country that when the citizens give anything up to that government that the government doesn’t want more at a later time?

 

Then, you aren't listening closely to Sanders, Pete. His denials of being a Communist fall flat since there is little doubt that he is a Marxist out and out. I am certain that behind his concealed oratory, Mayor Pete is as well.

 

I don't know why you can never post that you disagree without insulting others. That said, I just want to know who on earth is going to PAY for all the "pie in the sky" promises of FREE STUFF that Bernie, Liz and the others are making.

Like most of our generation, I have a work ethic and worked all my life to provide for my family. I can't imagine working hard and handing over what I made to support some loser who chooses NOT to work. I get even madder about my tax dollars supporting ILLEGAL aliens. I don't think we need more of that crap. Got a student loan? PAY IT BACK as you promised to do. I never in my life borrowed anything I couldn't repay.

 

@Peter Renfro , please tell me your understanding of Socialism. How is it different from Communism? Why do you think it will work? How will it work?

 

Shirley, Just as I pointed out. You typed Socialism,I typed socialism.
What I want to see is a society closer to Canada, Australia, a good portion of Europe.
America thrives on competition,trouble is, with competition there is always a loser. Nothing at all wrong with winners or losers in sports competitions. Life is not a sport. Just how badly do the losers if life need to fall before you feel some responsibility towards your fellow human beings.
Right there in the Preamble to our Constitution, we formed this union for the Common Good, but of course many say that the preamble is nothing more than foreplay,just so much BS until we get to the Articles, the meat of the affair. I say not the preamble is our mission Statement and "The Common Good" is foremost in that mission. Our nation was not founded so that individuals could get rich,but that the common man could obtain a decent lifestyle.
Some people are just not able to make it in this society,many through no fault of there own,some admittedly,solely at fault for their lot in life.
What do we do with these? Let them die? Ship them off to the county Poor Farm, we can't house the homeless we have now,but you are OK with thousands losing their homes to medical debt each year?
Why don't we start transitioning people to medicare in ten year increments 144 buck per month from every breathing soul. Let the insurance folks continue with their Advantage plans.
Free Community College< why not, cut back a bit on the corporate welfare the Commerce Department doles out to already successful industry each year. Y'all are apparently ok with that kind of Socialism.
Our crop of students is pretty Damn close to the bottom of the barrel each year, but you had to pay loans so everybody else damn sure should
Speaking of education, many school districts have graduation rates of 60% and lower. What are we going to do? Available jobs require more and more technical skill,skill that our schools are not teaching, skills that industry need but expects the taxpayer to foot the training bill.
Whether you like it or not,unless you can pull some magical freakin rabbit out of your hat, this situation is not going to get any better and we will of necessity need to become a exponentially a more socialist country.

You ain't the Lone Fricken Ranger that had to work. I spent years eating Ramen Noodle and Baloney sandwiches, laying in the driveway trying to get my car to run at least long enough to get me to work.,sorting through the bills to see which one needed to be paid and which could wait.
It frosts my coolie just like it does yours,to see the welfare queen buying steak cookies, but what are going to do? where is the line between compassion and cruelty?

I would love to be able to say,"I've got mine,you pound salt!", but that ain't the way the Good Lord made me!

 

Be carefull what you wish for.

Corbyn was kicked to touch with less than that.

 

I wouldn't have said it so bluntly as can be read elsewhere in this thread but without a clear definition you end up talking at cross purposes. It can' t be taken for granted that everybody understands a term in the same way. But perhaps the problem is that it is taken for granted.

The questions asked by others in this thread show that it seems necessary to establish some common ground. What strikes me is that when it's basically about a different way of distributing goods and services in society, i.e. by the state, this is immediately denounced as "Socialism" or even "Communism" as exemplified by the former Soviet Union and eastern bloc countries in Europe. That is done because these two terms are jaded, have a negative connotation and, thus, fit the bill. Yet they are different animals because they give different answers to the property question.

1. Communism aims to turn private property into people's property. Its advocates are also against a market economy but in favor of a centrally planned one. In essence, they want a completely different society, one beyond capitalism. Is there anyone in the US who wants to get rid of private property entirely? I doubt it. So, no communist threat then.
2. Then there's the Marxist-style Socialism understood as a preliminary stage of communism which does not have private property worth mentioning any more but is already based on people's property. (Former eastern bloc countries.)

3. In contrast to these two there's Democratic Socialism which is often equated with Marxist-style communism/socialism by some in order to denounce it in the same way. Democratic Socialism does not want to overthrow capitalism but wants to have a higher proportion of publicly owned companies. It doesn't want to get rid of private property completely as its namesake does. Note that publicly owned property is not the same as people's property. That shouldn't be confused. It also has a different idea of distributive justice.

The discussion in the US and here on SOC seems to revolve around just that, i.e., the question: How much welfare, what degree of support finally paid for by the tax payers would people like to see in this country? If that is true, it means that it's NOT about old school concepts like "Communism" or "Socialism" and the question of who owns capital goods.
In sum, if someone is against inflating the welfare state and social benefits, why not call a spade a spade and just admit it rather than label it with the ghosts of the past?

 

Had to double check your avatar - thought it was a 'Brit' writing
Well said gal

 

"Speaking of education, many school districts have graduation rates of 60% and lower. What are we going to do? Available jobs require more and more technical skill,skill that our schools are not teaching, skills that industry need but expects the taxpayer to foot the training bill."

Therein lies a great part of the problem. Not everybody will benefit from going to college. Our schools should be teaching students how to make a living, not some of the garbage they are teaching now.


"I spent years eating Ramen Noodle and Baloney sandwiches, laying in the driveway trying to get my car to run at least long enough to get me to work.,sorting through the bills to see which one needed to be paid and which could wait."

You have worked hard, scraped by and done without in order to become able to earn a good living. Well done. Now, suppose the government wants to take part of what you have worked so hard to achieve and give it for free to someone who, for whatever reason, hasn't worked as hard and achieved as much as you have. How will you feel about that? Not how I should feel or how someone else should feel, but how do you feel?

 

"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
-- George Bernard Shaw