What is socialism?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Irwin

Irwin

Well-known Member
Location
Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
If you Google socialism, you can come up with a few different definitions...

From Oxford languages: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.​
​
From Wikipedia: Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production.​
​
From Britannica: Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources.​
​
From Dictionary.com: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.​

Some of the definitions define it as public ownership of production while others say that it includes public control of production, i.e. regulation. I've always understood it to be public ownership of production, but I may have been wrong.

What's been your understanding of socialism.
 

My understanding is that if I pay my share of taxes, I will benefit by receiving certain benefits, when I need them, and being able to share in these programs>>>
1.jpg

What angers me is when some people and corporations do not pay their fair share, or in some cases do not pay any taxes, but still benefit from these programs.

55 major companies paid $0 in federal taxes on their 2020 profits: report https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/55-companies-paid-zero-in-federal-2020-taxes-itep-report/
 
Last edited:
Irwin said:
If you Google socialism, you can come up with a few different definitions...

From Oxford languages: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.​
​
From Wikipedia: Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production.​
​
From Britannica: Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources.​
​
From Dictionary.com: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.​

Some of the definitions define it as public ownership of production while others say that it includes public control of production, i.e. regulation. I've always understood it to be public ownership of production, but I may have been wrong.

What's been your understanding of socialism.
Click to expand...
Public buildings and lands are held by the government, for the use by the public. Roads, all kinds of infrastructure, even GPS is held for the good of, and use by the public. The term "socialism" has been weaponized to invoke fear and loathing, and as an insult by those that seek to sway the public conversation.
 
All of the above, plus:

It's thought by many who have worked really hard on it that humans lived a mostly socialist lifestyle (i.e., hunter/gatherer/foraging band) for at least 25,000 years--some scientists think it was closer to 50,000--after becoming homosapiens-sapiens (same as we are now except maybe for lactose and high altitude tolerance). So looks like after hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, that dreaded ol' socialism (gasp) is the lifestyle, at least in some respects, that most humans evolved to thrive in. It's just science; I'll bet that 25,000 years (at least) against the monarchist/dictatorship/authoritarian/feudalistic/hyper-capitalist, dog-eat-dog, supposedly natural lifestyle that's only lasted (in some places on the planet) 5,000 years tops. (Talk to a biologist about 5,000 years being important & they'll laugh you out of the room; "5,000 years?! That's the blink of an eye!") So, IMO, 25,000 beats 5,000 all to heck and gone for what's "natural."
 
And, as the saying goes, "No man is an island". We need each other. To chip in and join in for the sake our present and our future.

I remember when the 'Tea Party' first became public at rallies. There were people with teabags hanging from their hats, on scooters and with oxygen that their Medicare paid for, holding up signs stating "Keep government out of my healthcare". Our government gave them mobility and was helping them breath.
 
horseless carriage said:
This thread is sailing very close to the political wind, wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...
Probably. However, posting is still sort of in the abstract, no references to current politicians or occurrences.

Totalitarianism doesn't seem like communism.
Click to expand...
Totalitarianism could be manifested wherever a centralized and dictatorial government is in place. Fascism is of course just as much a centralized system of power in government as is Communism. Fascist countries currently include Brazil, Japan, Germany, Italy and Austria.
 
A few posts have veered into politics, but we're doing pretty good in not turning it into a political discussion. It's more an economic discussion because socialism is an economic system. Its antonym is capitalism.

Socialism is where the public (i.e. the government) controls the means of production.
Capitalism is private ownership and control of production.

And then there are dictatorships vs. democracies. A dictatorship is completely centralized government around one person. Democracies are decentralized with equal distribution of power among the populace; everyone has an equal say in how policies are formulated and implemented (theoretically speaking, that is) and they voice their opinions via their vote.

In the U.S., we have a representative democracy in that we elect people who we believe will legislate in our best interests. In a pure democracy, the people would vote for every piece of legislation.
 
Ceege said:
What angers me is when some people and corporations do not pay their fair share, or in some cases do not pay any taxes, but still benefit from these programs.

55 major companies paid $0 in federal taxes on their 2020 profits: report https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/55-companies-paid-zero-in-federal-2020-taxes-itep-report/
Click to expand...
Those businesses are following the LEGAL tax codes that have been in place for decades. The tax laws should be scrutenized, but you can't fault them for using legal methods to avoid taxes; don't you do the same thing? If taxes were equitable perhaps many major manufacturers wouldn't have fled for China.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="
" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Prefix: Social. Suffix: --ism.

Everyone (society) is entitled to own a piece of the economic and industrial goods by collective monies, etc. and reap the rewards, etc. (..ism). Good definition as any I guess? Stalin --ism: Marx--ism, for comparison.
 
Just my personal opinion but it seems as though we're on a path to social-wasim or maybe antisocialism. I don't sense a lot of sociabilty in the places I go or the people I encounter, day to day. Or maybe "not a lot" isn't the right term but I sense more "hostilism" than socialism these days. Maybe my memory is selective but before all these labels and terms started being bandied about, the whole social structure of my life felt a lot more inclusive rather than feeling exclusive, as it does now. Socialism is just yet another label that means different things to different people, I'd say. It's like defining what is pornography, I know it when I see it but you may not see it the same way as I do.
My 2¢ worth.
 
Nathan said, "The term "socialism" has been weaponized to invoke fear and loathing, and as an insult by those that seek to sway the public conversation." I agree. There has been a concerted effort to equate "socialism" with communist totalitarianism. This horrible "socialism" is like the boogie man, who is gonna get you. "Socialism" is a nebulous term, it can mean almost anything, but generally it's a union for the common good.
 
mellowyellow said:
It's complicated, I get the feeling that socialism is feared in America, but could be mistaken.
Click to expand...
I think it is by many. Especially where one network has a propensity for stating "radical socialist agenda."

I think too many people in the U.S. forget how many things they take advantage of that everyone pays into. Public school included. I received a substandard education and never had kids, yet part of my tax dollars goes to public school. It's part of living in a society.

I also don't think anyone can start this topic without realizing it's a big hot button issue.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top