topic Re: SOCIALISM in Community Spirit

SOCIALISM

nero_bolt — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 23:30:15 GMT

An open discussion of the merits and downsides of SOCIALISMS comrades (and toss in capitalism)

So who would like to see Australia turn into a Socialist country with the full socialist mantra?

Should people that work hard and make something of their lives simply share it with others who dont? As is the socialist way.

Should companies and business share all their profit with their workers, again as is the socialist way...

Should someone who starts a business and works long hours and works hard just hand over their efforts to their staff under the banner of socialism?

Does socialism work?

So peoples thoughts and views... POLITE posts please on the socialist mantra

Re: SOCIALISM

silverfaun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 00:03:09 GMT

Who was it who coined the phrase "Chardonnay Socialism" ? I think it was Keating, he had no time for the socialist left in his own party, poured scorn on them.

A bit like the ones who "seem" to care so much, so much more than anyone else, but are just keyboard socialists or as Keating said "Chardonnay socialists".

Re: SOCIALISM

**meep** — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 00:07:51 GMT

I also have a question:

Who would move to a country that has adopted Socialism as its Official Ideology?

Which country would that be and why?

Re: SOCIALISM

*ibis — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 00:14:04 GMT

its easy to be a socialist if you are born into money

when you have to work for it you dont like to share with parasites

Re: SOCIALISM

silverfaun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 00:24:24 GMT

I wonder how many are true died in the wool reds? Gillard was a socialist, belonged to the socialist left,that never stopped her from living the high life, she never did any community or charitable work. A true Chardonnay Socialist.

We saw the ruin of the USSR and how all the smaller countries were freed from their iron grip, we saw the joy on their faces & the re uniting of families but the other side of the coin is dark & terrible for the human race.

I would be a traitor to my class & country if I ever utterd the words "I am a left leaning Socialist".

Re: SOCIALISM

nero_bolt — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 00:40:32 GMT

A polite question that no one needs to answer if they feel uncomfortable identifying their beliefs or ideology

So who *considers* or identifies themselves as a socialist?

@**meep** wrote:
I also have a question:

Who would move to a country that has adopted Socialism as its Official Ideology?

Which country would that be and why?

Meep I believe Venezuela is a wonderful tropical paradise and a shining example of the socialist agenda and run by a true socialist govt. I wonder if the people there are happy and well off, never been there so I dont know. They do all get free Plasma TV's given to them in Venezuela by the govt so socialisim must be working there

Any other countries that people can name that are socialist

and how are they going as an economy and for their people?

I am interested in this and hearing how the socialist mantra holds up and how good it is

Re: SOCIALISM

silverfaun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 01:14:56 GMT

I have posted this elsewhere because the mere thought of Socialism should be outed, it is against all human rights & those who espouse it are ignorant.

Socialism

Socialism is not a natural state. It may work in family situations and small sects specifically devoted to a common purpose.

It does not and cannot work on a large scale. Its failure is not the result of bad leaders or leadership. It fails because people are not molecules.

They are purposeful. Each person has different aspirations, motivations and needs. Socialism is a one-size-fits-all model. The nature of man is diverse and inconsistent with the uniformity of Socialism.

Initial movements toward Socialism can be obtained with minimal State coercion. Major progress, however, is impossible without mandating uniformity. That cannot be accomplished voluntarily. It always requires the use of force and power.

The kind face of Socialism necessarily transforms into a face of coercion and evil.

Socialism cannot progress based on freedom and voluntary choice. Its success is dependent on the politics of force.

Nothing popular requires force. Ultimately Socialism to reach its goals must escalate to outright oppression and physical violence against men and property. That is the only way to implement unpopular measures.

Re: SOCIALISM

**meep** — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 01:43:05 GMT

Yes, as I have also posted, socialism is a theory that is inconsistent with human nature. It always fails.

Re: SOCIALISM

silverfaun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 01:47:17 GMT

100% correct & the people who feel all warm & fuzzy about it are ingnorant, don't know history and is an insult to the millions who sufferd under such regimes & are still suffering today.

I think it is also is a topic that has a hidden govt. bashing agenda.

Re: SOCIALISM

the_great_she_elephant — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 02:20:20 GMT

@**meep** wrote:
Yes, as I have also posted, socialism is a theory that is inconsistent with human nature. It always fails.

Monogomy is also inconsistant with human nature - does this mean it always fails and we should not adopt it?

As I said in another thread: socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned orregulated by the community as a whole.

What do you think the result would be if there were no regulation by the community (through an elected Government) of these things?

During and after WWII we had pretty rigorous regulation of production, distribution and exchange - it was called rationing. Was this socialism and therefore evil?

Re: SOCIALISM

silverfaun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 02:38:32 GMT

Keating for all his self aggrandizement & lack of humanity knew that the socialist left in his party were to be scorned & ignored as a dangerous element. The tolerated a full blown communist in the party for years but he didn't prosper under Keating.

Re: SOCIALISM

**meep** — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 02:45:56 GMT

Monogamy may very well work for some people.

Socialist ideology has to work for everyone and that's where it fails.

Re: SOCIALISM

the_great_she_elephant — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 03:04:08 GMT

So are you advocating that there should be no regulation of production, distribution and exchange, that the economy (including wages) should be based purely on supply and demand , and that if people can't afford the necessities of life that's just tough luck?

Or are you advocating some regulation in some areas and if do, at what point does this regulation become socialism?

Re: SOCIALISM

i-need-a-martini — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 03:29:07 GMT

@nero_wulf wrote:
An open discussion of the merits and downsides of SOCIALISMS comrades (and toss in capitalism)

So who would like to see Australia turn into a Socialist country with the full socialist mantra?

Should people that work hard and make something of their lives simply share it with others who dont? As is the socialist way.

Should companies and business share all their profit with their workers, again as is the socialist way...

Should someone who starts a business and works long hours and works hard just hand over their efforts to their staff under the banner of socialism?

Does socialism work?

So peoples thoughts and views... POLITE posts please on the socialist mantra

Nero - you seemed to have missed what meaning of socialism. Perhaps you don't actually understand. Or perhaps you are simple being simplistic to prove some point. Not sure. On another thread I notice you confuse totalitarian governments with socialism. So not sure what your understanding is of, say, Lenins Russia. Either way your questions aren't answerable.

Asking if anyone would want to live in a socialist country or whether socialism actually works is as impossible as asking anyone if they would want to live in a country which is 100% capitalist or whether capitalism actually works. Neither do of course.

However those countries with capitalist economies and strong socialist leanings are the ideal we should all aspire to. Norway, Finland and Canada come to mind.

On the other hand, we can see what a mess a country can be in when they embrace capitalism as their main form or economic and social governance (US). Not to mention what happens to those countries when capitalism fails their leaders.

Re: SOCIALISM

**meep** — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 03:36:58 GMT

Socialism does not equal regulation so not sure how to answer that....

You can have a society full of regulations and it doesn't equal socialism

You can have a commune with no regulations, that would be communism - what one may consider as the purest form of socialism.

have to run now, be back later, if the thread is still open lol

Re: SOCIALISM

the_great_she_elephant — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 03:47:04 GMT

It seems to me a bit pointless to argue for or against Socialism without having a very clear idea of what it is and what it isn not.

I think you hit the nail on the head, Martini. Those countries with capitalist economies and strong socialist leanings are the ideal we should all aspire to.

Re: SOCIALISM

freakiness — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 03:49:31 GMT

@**meep** wrote:
Socialism does not equal regulation so not sure how to answer that....

You can have a society full of regulations and it doesn't equal socialism

You can have a commune with no regulations, that would be communism - what one may consider as the purest form of socialism.

have to run now, be back later, if the thread is still open lol

I don't think Margo said anything about extreme purist socialism either, quite sure she didn't. She said socialist, from her perspective.

Re: SOCIALISM

the_great_she_elephant — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 04:00:31 GMT

Should people that work hard and make something of their lives simply share it with others who dont? As is the socialist way.

Should those too young, too old or toos sick to work be left to starve by those who are able to work?

Should companies and business share all their profit with their workers, again as is the socialist way...

should companies be entitled to make huge profits on the back of a poorly paid workforce, as is the Capitalist way?

Should someone who starts a business and works long hours and works hard just hand over their efforts to their staff under the banner of socialism?

Should workers toiling 12 hours a day in a sweatshop see almost all the fruit of their labours syphoned off into profits for the owner under the banner of Capitalism

Does socialism work?

Does Capitalism work?

Both sets of answers allude to absurd extremes and have equal relevance - or lack thereof - to the discussion.

Re: SOCIALISM

silverfaun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 04:55:11 GMT

Equating democracy with a little bit of socialism is like saying someone is just a little bit pregnant.

But democracy with a strong ideal of social justice is my preference. Socialism without democracy is anathema to most thinking people and pure socialism is on the wrong side of history.

Re: SOCIALISM

the_great_she_elephant — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 05:12:41 GMT

Democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

It is the system under which the community agrees, by majority vote, on the way in which it wishes to be regulated. Of itsef,l it has nothing to do with either economics or social justice.

A Democratic system, which embracesa a regulated form of Capitalism while at the same time espousing the principles of social justice, would seem to me to be an ideal system and since the concept of social justice embraces several of the principles of Sociialism it would seem to be a workable compromise between the two extremes.