What is socialism?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Henry VI, Part 2: Act 4, scene 2

Jack Cade: "Be brave, then, for your captain is brave and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven halfpenny loaves sold for a penny. The three-hooped pot shall have ten hoops, and I will make it felony to drink small beer. All the realm shall be in common, and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass. And when I am king, as king I will be......."

That Bill Shakespeare.....ahead of his time, eh?
Very much ahead of his time, which is why his work is still studied in Australian schools. In my five years of high school I studied eleven of his plays. It was a publicly funded school. My parents could never have afforded a private education for me or my sister.
 

However, I maintain that communism and socialism are not the same thing at all.
I do not understand why the word 'socialism' puts the fear of the Almighty into so many people's minds. It does not mean that people lose personal freedom but it does require everyone to shoulder some responsibility for their less well off fellow citizens, depending on our ability to do so.
Great...if it wasn't for the fact that those who advocate 'socialism' appear to inevitably attempt to steer it into totalitarianism.....the door-to-door-salesman's proverbial foot.

Every single time.

Until the next batch of "Well, they didn't get it right-ers come along" and here we go again.
 
Henry VI, Part 2: Act 4, scene 2

Jack Cade: "Be brave, then, for your captain is brave and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven halfpenny loaves sold for a penny. The three-hooped pot shall have ten hoops, and I will make it felony to drink small beer. All the realm shall be in common, and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass. And when I am king, as king I will be......."

That Bill Shakespeare.....ahead of his time, eh?
There was this claim in a utopia in an R. Crumb comic...

"In the future, everyone will have all of everything!"
 

Very much ahead of his time, which is why his work is still studied in Australian schools. In my five years of high school I studied eleven of his plays. It was a publicly funded school. My parents could never have afforded a private education for me or my sister.
Have you sent any kids thru the same system?

If so, how does it compare?
 
There was this claim in a utopia in an R. Crumb comic...

"In the future, everyone will have all of everything!"
A number of years back someone commented, (quite seriously I believe), on a national newspaper here, that since Canada had oil we should get it for free, (forget what it takes in knowledge/labor/equipment/money etc, etc, to bring it out of the ground).

I responded by saying Canada has gold too.....should everyone get that for nothing?

Crickets.
 
Have you sent any kids thru the same system?

If so, how does it compare?
Actually I have experienced the public school system for myself and my kids. I was selected for an enrichment program in Years 5 & 6 and so was my daughter. Our son missed out.

Daughter went on to a selective public school as I did but hers was co-ed; mine was girls only.
At that time I was teaching in a girls' catholic junior high and I could see that the selective school wasn't as good for the students as it thought it was. I pulled her out for the last two years and placed her in a girls' Anglican school. It was a horrible experience for her - too many snobbish and catty girls and she was bullied by one in particular, however she did score well enough to be admitted into nurse training school. She has thrived in that profession

Our son went to secondary school at a boys Anglican Grammar School (private). His father was one of the masters there, teaching maths and engineering studies so I had a very good idea of the school culture. It was good for him academically but he hated it as a social environment. The long and the short of it is that no one school or school system is a good fit for every child.

Private schools in Australia receive government funding in addition to income from fees and property investments. Public schools only receive funding from governments. Private schools offer some scholarships to allow high performing students to attend. It is not altruism. These students add to the prestige of the school when the results of statewide tests are published. The wealthy seldom give away money to the poor for charity's sake. There is always some advantage for themselves or their class.

The long and the short of it is that education which is a mix of public and private funding (socialism and capitalism) provides opportunities for advancement for all students. However, the old school tie tends to offer even more to the well off.

Communism does not come into it.
 
Actually I have experienced the public school system for myself and my kids. I was selected for an enrichment program in Years 5 & 6 and so was my daughter. Our son missed out.

Daughter went on to a selective public school as I did but hers was co-ed; mine was girls only.
At that time I was teaching in a girls' catholic junior high and I could see that the selective school wasn't as good for the students as it thought it was. I pulled her out for the last two years and placed her in a girls' Anglican school. It was a horrible experience for her - too many snobbish and catty girls and she was bullied by one in particular, however she did score well enough to be admitted into nurse training school. She has thrived in that profession

Our son went to secondary school at a boys Anglican Grammar School (private). His father was one of the masters there, teaching maths and engineering studies so I had a very good idea of the school culture. It was good for him academically but he hated it as a social environment. The long and the short of it is that no one school or school system is a good fit for every child.

Private schools in Australia receive government funding in addition to income from fees and property investments. Public schools only receive funding from governments. Private schools offer some scholarships to allow high performing students to attend. It is not altruism. These students add to the prestige of the school when the results of statewide tests are published. The wealthy seldom give away money to the poor for charity's sake. There is always some advantage for themselves or their class.

The long and the short of it is that education which is a mix of public and private funding (socialism and capitalism) provides opportunities for advancement for all students. However, the old school tie tends to offer even more to the well off.

Communism does not come into it.
Thanks for the interesting perspective.

I went to the CA public school system in the 50s. Later, in the mid 70s thru the early 80s, I taught in the same system. It had changed somewhat by that time. Over time I have developed some strong opinions about what is most useful for a child growing up.

Much later, when I had changed careers, we had our daughter and I shopped all public and private schools (you could transfer to chosen public schools here at that time) here in Portland. OR. We settled on an Episcopal school, K-12( with boarding as well as dayschool) here that we had to drive her to, but it was on the way to work for both of us and so that was no real problem.

The school worked well for her, it was very demanding in a relatively positive way. I've heard some parents who looked at the school with intent to send their kids say they felt it was too snooty, but this was not our daughter's experience, nor is she what you'd call a socially driven person.

We let her select her college, within bounds, and she chose a small east coast college that in many ways was the college equivalent of the K-12 Episcopal school and did well there, also.

You can never tell, but personally, I suspect that the parents of kids who had the most troubles coming into the school, transferred in, and the workload and expectancies were so unlike what they'd grown accustomed to in the public system--nor did their parents really grasp the difference in workload/expectancies--that they were under immediate academic pressure. Because a very high premium *among students* was placed on academic success, this may have cause a two pronged problem.
 
I can't believe this discussion is still going.

There would not be a single economy on the planet that is either pure capitalism or pure socialism.
Most are a blend of both. It's horses for courses. For some aspects of society socialism is the answer, for others, let the market prevail.

Public schooling is an example of socialism that aims for basic education for everyone. Before there were public schools many children were not sent to school at all. They learnt what they could from their often unschooled parents and went to work at age 10. Slightly better off parents sent their children to dame schools where they learnt to read and write and the girls learnt manners, deportment and how to set the table properly. Then they also went to work around the age of 13 or stayed at home as home helpers. My mother in law went to one such school. MIL then went to work in a cigarette factory cutting the stems out of the tobacco leaf.

Do people really want to revert to the days when there were no public schools, transport, libraries or hospitals?

Of course not, but such public amenities must be paid for. The options are fee for service, tolls (capitalism) or income taxes (socialism).

Taxation if by far the fairest way to provide public services and amenities. You cannot do it by relying on the philanthropy of the wealthy.
I hereby declare that it’s true that taxation is by far the fairest way to provide for funding of public programs whether under a capitalist economy/government or a socialist one!!

Now, I will also mention that I can be counted on to always, always correct mistaken ideas about what socialism is. FDR agreed with me. After installing all those socially-beneficial programs, at the end of his last term he said “I saved capitalism”. So, once again, what is this mysterious “socialism” if it’s not socialized public programs?

All sources that are fundamentally capitalist and/or not pro-socialist will say public education is socialism; Social Security is socialism; Medicare is socialism; public transportation is socialism; parks are socialism. And FDR disagreed. Such programs make the harsh edges of capitalism more tolerable.

But all sources that are pro-socialist say capitalism must go. It has to end. The two are not compatible.
https://www.socialism101.com/basic

Also...
"Socialism is not mere government ownership, a welfare state, or a repressive bureaucracy. Socialism is a new social and economic order in which workers and consumers control production and community residents control their neighborhoods, homes, and schools. The production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few."
https://www.socialistpartyusa.net/


Socialism would ultimately ban private ownership of business for private profit.

So public education is not socialism. Worker ownership and control of production is socialism.
 
1) I don't know about "US anticommunist propaganda' but I have visited somewhere in the region of 84 countries, so I don't consider myself totally sheltered from reality.
But since there are no socialist countries but maybe Cuba and I doubt you visited Cuba, you had to have visited capitalist countries, all of which produce propaganda for their system like all countries do. So I would not expect you to have experienced a pro-socialist society. Yugoslavia may be one of the more “socialism-tolerant” countries however.

2) The Red Phoenix, yeah, right.
It’s a source of some truly socialist/Marxist ideas. That has nothing to do with your aversion to socialism. Are you really so afraid to expose yourself to alternate data and info?

3) 'Insurrection' That was as close to an insurrection as the Afghanistan debacle was to a 'success'.
Right. But it was an ATTEMPTED insurrection and the law makes no distinction, nor does the Constitution. Why do you live in the USA yet oppose our Constitution?
 
Last edited:
Rhetorical question and a rather silly one at that.

Leftism is a new term to me. Does it imply being supportive of socialism in a free society?
Or, are you suggesting this term implies card carrying Communist?
You’re kidding! The right routinely calls Democrats “leftists”. ([Edit:] OH!!! I see now you’re from Australia!) When they say it they mean anyone who is not politically as far right as they are. To them, a centrist like Biden is a “leftist” and sometimes “a communist”!


East Germany under Communism was not free. The wall was to keep people in, not to prevent people from entering the country. It was an impoverished economy before the wall came down so why would anyone want to travel there after that unless it was to buy property cheaply and seek economic opportunities.

I would guess that some West Germans may have grabbed any economic opportunities that freedom delivered.

However, I maintain that communism and socialism are not the same thing at all.
You’re right. But here’s something to be clear on and a trap to avoid: Many unaware, uninformed people use the word “communism” to mean either of two very, . . . . in fact, ENTIRELY, different things. First, someone will use it to refer to communist theory, policies, strategies, and ideology, usually of a communist party, or of a society over which a “communist party” rules with their policies, ideology, etc.

That’s one. Ideology. Politics. Strategies.

The other one that people sometimes refer to is communist society. And that is a society that emerges naturally from a couple of centuries of socialist society (theoretically) and it is characterized by utilizing and having no money/currency, having no classes, and having no state “machine” to enforce or regulate anything. It only would have a skeleton of a state dedicated mostly to clerical duties of record-keeping and publishing of useful data like production statistics. So when you hear someone refer to a “communist state” you know they don’t know the first thing about which they speak.

Thing is, in any conversation of the uninformed, you will often be able to detect a mindless switching back and forth from use of “communism” to first mean one, and then the other, and they have no idea what they’re doing. That kind of mindlessness is a good indication that you’re seeing or hearing propaganda being mindlessly spread.


I do not understand why the word 'socialism' puts the fear of the Almighty into so many people's minds. It does not mean that people lose personal freedom but it does require everyone to shoulder some responsibility for their less well off fellow citizens, depending on our ability to do so.
Good point indeed! You could say that socialism is just the end of greed by owners of the larger corporations, too!

Here’s what motivates socialist: You could list our top dozen major national problems and a socialist can tell you how capitalism caused the problem and why capitalism cannot and does not solve the problem even after decades and decades. Only the end of private profit can make it possible to solve them.
 
But since there are no socialist countries by maybe Cuba and I doubt you visited Cuba, you had to have visited capitalist countries, all of which produce propaganda for their system like all countries do. So I would not expect you to have experienced a pro-socialist society. Yugoslavia may be one of the more “socialism-tolerant” countries however.




Right. But it was an ATTEMPTED insurrection and the law makes no distinction, nor does the Constitution. Why do you live in the USA yet oppose our Constitution?
1) I was in Cuba when Brezhnev visited. I was in Yugoslavia when Tito was in command. (Post USSR, I've been to Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia.)

2) Why do I live in the USA? I don't.
 
1) I was in Cuba when Brezhnev visited. I was in Yugoslavia when Tito was in command. (Post USSR, I've been to Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia.)

2) Why do I live in the USA? I don't.
Oh. Yeah. I see you’re in Ontario.
 
You could say that socialism is just the end of greed by owners of the larger corporations, too!

Here’s what motivates socialist: You could list our top dozen major national problems and a socialist can tell you how capitalism caused the problem and why capitalism cannot and does not solve the problem even after decades and decades. Only the end of private profit can make it possible to solve them.
That must be why Venezuela went from being a starving bankrupt mess to becoming one of the richest countries in South America?

Oh, wait.....I have that ass backwards... :ROFLMAO:
 
That must be why Venezuela went from being a starving bankrupt mess to becoming one of the richest countries in South America?

Oh, wait.....I have that ass backwards... :ROFLMAO:
Yeah, I should be ashamed to be so stupid as to dare talk about socialism, let alone advocate it. (The American taboo in operation!)
 
I hereby declare that it’s true that taxation is by far the fairest way to provide for funding of public programs whether under a capitalist economy/government or a socialist one!!

Now, I will also mention that I can be counted on to always, always correct mistaken ideas about what socialism is. FDR agreed with me. After installing all those socially-beneficial programs, at the end of his last term he said “I saved capitalism”. So, once again, what is this mysterious “socialism” if it’s not socialized public programs?

All sources that are fundamentally capitalist and/or not pro-socialist will say public education is socialism; Social Security is socialism; Medicare is socialism; public transportation is socialism; parks are socialism. And FDR disagreed. Such programs make the harsh edges of capitalism more tolerable.

But all sources that are pro-socialist say capitalism must go. It has to end. The two are not compatible.
https://www.socialism101.com/basic

Also...
"Socialism is not mere government ownership, a welfare state, or a repressive bureaucracy. Socialism is a new social and economic order in which workers and consumers control production and community residents control their neighborhoods, homes, and schools. The production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few."
https://www.socialistpartyusa.net/


Socialism would ultimately ban private ownership of business for private profit.

So public education is not socialism. Worker ownership and control of production is socialism.
Does the socialism you describe exist anywhere?
 
I was watching a show called Prophesy Watchers last night. The guy on there claims the grays of UFO abduction fame are just vehicles inhabited by fallen angels and socialism is their creation. Lots of proof with history and scripture if you buy and read his book. :rolleyes:
 
Well, it’s very clear to me that you have the standard, false view of socialism that has been cultivated by US anticommunist propaganda for 70 years. If we just see and read what is prepared for us to see and read, that is the result. To actually know what it is one must look into the horse’s mouth and see. HERE’s one of many sources, and it isn’t even the best.


Don’t you think that is/would be true of the USA too? We’ve seen some glimpses of it during COVID and the insurrection.
Oh Jesus. The Red Phoenix? Really?

What is the true view of socialism? The USSR in its glory days? China? Cuba? North Korea? Venezuela?

Socialism (government ownership of the means of production) is an inherently flawed economic system that has never worked anywhere. And please don't point to Sweden or Denmark, which are free capitalist countries with strong social safety nets.

Free market capitalism as practiced in the US has many failings and needs more regulation and more reform. But please don't talk about socialism and expect anyone to take you seriously.
 
2012 - couple weeks 'escape the cold' vacation in Costa Rica - intercepted by young Scotsman on way to beach - he's handing out fake (we'll sell you a time share) 'scratch & win' cards.

I get Four Monkeys - big winner.

"You don't look too excited" he says.

("Naah, I didn't see a turnip truck nearby...besides which, I don't think I just fell off one anyway.")
 
Does the socialism you describe exist anywhere?
First recognize that a new economic and political system will never be abruptly installed “overnight” anywhere. Such a transition will take time. (Marx brilliantly mentioned this in “A Critique of the Gotha Programme”.) And during that time the capitalist class will use every trick and means they have to stop, prevent, and sabotage socialism and return to the capitalist system. And that is “kinda-sorta” what happened in every case so far (and for a reason that is now understood) with the possible exceptions of Cuba and Laos.

So at this time, no worker-owned, worker-controlled economic system is the dominant system in any country. Even Cuba says they’re working on it as they make incremental progress after 60 years.
 
First recognize that a new economic and political system will never be abruptly installed “overnight” anywhere. Such a transition will take time. (Marx brilliantly mentioned this in “A Critique of the Gotha Programme”.) And during that time the capitalist class will use every trick and means they have to stop, prevent, and sabotage socialism and return to the capitalist system. And that is “kinda-sorta” what happened in every case so far (and for a reason that is now understood) with the possible exceptions of Cuba and Laos.

So at this time, no worker-owned, worker-controlled economic system is the dominant system in any country. Even Cuba says they’re working on it as they make incremental progress after 60 years.
Right. So it's a dream that will never happen, accompanied by tyranny, poverty and misery. Sounds great! Where can I sign up?
 
So at this time, no worker-owned, worker-controlled economic system is the dominant system in any country. Even Cuba says they’re working on it as they make incremental progress after 60 years.
Bob Seger: Roll Me Away:

"Keep searchin' 'til I find what's right
And as the sunset faded I spoke to the faintest first starlight
And I said next time
Next time
We'll get it right"

:ROFLMAO:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top