Popularity of Socialism Spiking in US; 43 Percent Now Saying It Would Be Good for the Country

a reply to: FamCore

Most left-wingers have no idea what socialism is. Partially it is not their fault because there has been a historical revisionism as to what socialism truly is.

One of those "revisionism" is that "in socialism the people own and control the means of production." In fact this is FALSE because in socialism no one as individuals can own and control the means of production. The state claims to represent the people and it is the state which owns and controls the means of production.

As for the "a little socialism does no damage and does good claim" tell that to Germany before the nazis took power. Otto Von Bismarck was a staunch opponent of socialism at first, but because the left, mostly social democrats, in Germany kept demanding for drastic changes into socialism, and Von Bismarck wanted to stay in power he thought that "a little socialism would stop full blown socialism." But the opposite is what happened.

But even to this day "socialists" or those who advocate for a little socialism want to once again make the mistake Otto Von Bismarck and many others before and after him made.

Here is an example, and notice the source of the article.

The socialism vs. capitalism debate is not particularly helpful. Even in the 19th century, the conservative leader of Germany, Otto von Bismarck, proposed health insurance reform as a way to stop growing demands for socialism. The United States might consider that example, rather than fighting so-called socialism tooth and nail.
...

Commentary: A little bit of socialism makes capitalism work better

The above commentary, by a union source nonetheless, seems to be completely ignorant that "the little socialism" that Von Bismarck fell for allowed for Hitler and the nazis, and their own vision on socialism to take control of Germany.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The problem with "a little socialism" is that when they do that and it inevitably begins to fail, it's always blamed on the parts of the system that are not socialized. Look at Venezuela. They nationalized (socialized) the energy sector and claimed it would pay for all kinds of social programs. When it began to fall apart, it was used as an excuse to begin to clamp down on and nationalize/socialize all kinds of other things that were seen to be contributing to the problem because they were not likewise controlled by the government like the energy sector. And as the situation continues to deteriorate today, so badly that some areas are reduced to bare barter, the government now blames countries that are not socialized for Venezuela's problems.

a reply to: FamCore





Socialism Wants to take my Hard Earned Stuff ? Over their Dead Body Maybe ......

Wow...1,024 people took this survey????? Hmmmm...

The population of the US is something like 329,000,000, so 1,024 people (surveyed) represents about .0003% of the population!!

originally posted by: ofleming
a reply to: FamCore

that's scary to hear... socialism never ends well. When will people learn???

Perhaps when they are not starving, unemployed, homeless, dying before there time, seeing there family working to death for low pay.

Perhaps when people actually live the bible rather than claim to be christian's by giving there extra coat to the person that has non, sharing the food on there own plate with those that are hungry, sheltering the homeless under there own roof.

But noooooo you see you know best now don't you, the rich should have everything, the poor should be worked to death, the homeless don't deserve to live, the one without a coat whom could not find work or was too ill to work deserves to die.

When indeed will they ever learn.

A Christian Employer pay's his workers a FAIR and Ethical wage, a capitalist employer (you can not walk the middle of the road on that issue) pay's them as little as he possibly can and if every other employer does the same that is very little indeed.

Of course I myself am centre left but not from the US were your government and hoovers FBI did a great number in brainwashing your population against socialism and even purged some of your greatest film stars and movie directors (Orson Welles among a great many others) - of course they were using fire to fight fire as the soviets did have some agent's,. But then Cino/Soviet type communism is not really socialism it is rather a totalitarian rule with the PARTY taking the place of a monarchy in all but name and is actually far worse while centrist left is nothing like that, it is mostly capitalism with care for the people given a far higher priority than in any pure capitalists system and essential services (Education, health care and welfare safety net) protected and provided at state level.

Capitalism meanwhile can only burn bright while there is fuel and when that fuel is gone only those closest to the fire 'the rich' continue to benefit from it's dying light while they seek something else to burn, to be frank your system worked well enough when most of you had your own business or were otherwise self employed and money had more value (while the US was still expanding and in the period shortly thereafter) but then the corporations destroyed you and inflation took your money away - except for the elite - and that ended your American dream which despite taking on a quasi religious mythical level of devotion in the brain washed mass of the population was only ever an illusion to the majority anyway - a piece of cheese on a string to draw them along.

And anyway what will your current system do when there are no more job's because you know automation will replace even the cheapest labour some day, mass murder, sterilize and cull the population with engineered diseases, food additives, even war or continue to become more and more unequal until it fall's apart of it's own accord as happened to so very many civilizations in the past when the few had it all and the many had nothing.

Ever remember the story of Smaug the Dragon from the Hobbit living in lonely mountain with all the gold and jewel's in a pile, the elite are more than a little like that with power and wealth, if you threaten them in any way they will become that dragon hunting the thief, the difference is that they also have army of orc's to do there bidding were Smaug would have eaten them too.

Socialism is actually going strong in Europe. Its popular and people want more of it. I've personally experienced socialism and frankly its nothing like Fox news makes it sound. In most cases all it means is that you pay more tax but receive more services in return and because the state imposes price restrictions you tend to get more services for your money.

I was in France and Germany some time back and their public transport networks are just so much better because they are run on sociaist principles. The wealthy elite (Like Clinton and her gang) arent there at the top wringing every last cent out of you, so fares are cheaper and more money is spent on new carriages for the traveling public rather on new limo for the shareholders wh are already millionares.

If you want to see socialism thriving, check out Isreal, especially the new townships.They can get on with their lives without worrying that the rich will screw them over for their last few bucks. Their living costs are lower and they can use collective bargening to get a much better deal. You dont see much homelessness in Isreal, and they treat their veterans with a thousand times more respect, the Isreali version of the VA is well funded and effective because of socialism

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Exactly my point.

Polls are bs and don't reflect actual population.

It's targeted cherry picking.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Wow...1,024 people took this survey????? Hmmmm...

The population of the US is something like 329,000,000, so 1,024 people (surveyed) represents about .0003% of the population!!

That's a reasonable observation. Though to be fair, my assessment of it is (and has always been) that most people are (deep down) strongly inclined to socialistic thinking even if it makes their conscious mind twitch to think about it and/or they refuse to admit it.

Socialism is (fundamentally) rooted in all the same ideas as capitalism. Basically, collectivism always seeks to convert the individual into a slave to the mob. The particulars and specifics of it (whatever color shirt they wear) is splitting hairs.

EDIT - But the official far left does take advantage of the fact that it does sound awfully good to the average person to have a safety net and have other people pay for it. At the end of the day, humans are weak. And if we're not weak the vast majority of the time, we will almost inevitably have a moment of weakness that will destroy us if we fall and hit the ground with no cushioning. That's a scary thing and it's scarier the more precarious your original circumstances are.

a reply to: LABTECH767

The difference between what Biblical Christian living would be and what socialism is is actual choice. To be perfectly Christian in that manner, everyone in the society would choose to live it perfectly and freely from bottom to top. The poor work to get out of their poverty as much as those with more will give of what they have to see they have the breathing space to do it.

You know perfectly well that is not the idealized life we have because humans are human, and we have the choice to either perfectly abide by God or not. There are plenty of poor people content to live off of the largess of others as much as there are those with more who could give but won't, and many, many people who refuse to walk with God but against Him.

To enact modern socialism, there is no choice involved. It is all done by force. You cannot compel faith anymore than you can compel perfectly Christian living. And forcing anyone to do or be counter to who or what they are only creates resentment or works against the impulse to give they might otherwise have.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

Those "mere details" have lifted the world from poverty and made massive impacts on starvation, homelessness, and healthcare.

Without capitalism, there is no welfarism, which is what you're referring to.

Socialism is not welfarism. No socialist economics will ever create an economy that enjoys welfarism. The Nordic Model, which many Americans confuse for socialism because they are politically and economically illiterate, is only possible because of a robust market economy.

Stop confusing socialism with social programs. Stop confusing socialist "economics" with the features of capitalism (welfarism).

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: BrianFlanders

Those "mere details" have lifted the world from poverty and made massive impacts on starvation, homelessness, and healthcare.

Without capitalism, there is no welfarism, which is what you're referring to.

I think you missed the point that it all still really just boils down to slavery. I don't particularly make too many distinctions between the isms. I suppose it's fair enough to say that capitalism runs more smoothly than socialism but it still chews people up and spits out their bones just as well as anything else. It runs on blood, sweat and tears the same as anything else. You can earn the right to be a more comfortable slave within it if you work hard and you get lucky but the basic fact of what you are is eternally bound to your humanity and the basic facts of what that means.

Basically, you're arguing nuts and bolts with a misanthrope.

At the end of the day, capitalism and socialism are all about risk. This is where propaganda plays a role.

Capitalism works because there are big rewards, but there are also big risks and no safety net.

Socialism is all about risk avoidance. There is little risk, and there's always a safety net.

So, the more you can convince people they are incapable of dealing with the risk, the more likely you are to sell a socialistic concept to them.

Look at society today and how many people are risk averse. But herein lies the problem...many of these same people want big rewards without any risk. This is where the socialist mantra breaks down, because if there's no one paying to assuage this risk then the system can't survive.

I guess 80% of people living paycheck to paycheck has somethind to do with it

Highwst wealth inequality almost ever might as well

But, as usual everyone is operating under the false premise we are a capitalist market

We are not capitalist have a pseudo free market progressive government system that chooses winners and losers

a reply to: FamCore

To be fair people keep saying we don't have true capitalism. I'd say both are equally right. What we have now is a corrupted form of capitalism aka crony capitalism. All those socialism examples such as communism are as much true socialism as crony capitalism is true capitalism.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. As soon as capitalists stop making the crony capitalism excuse to excuse what capitalism has become and all it's flaws, then they can without being hypocrites claim all the corrupt twisted forms of socialism represent true socialism.

Both sides use the no true scottsman fallacy whenever the flawed versions of their side is called out. Crony capitalism is capitalism and communism is socialism but neither is the only example of both nor does capitalism HAVE to be crony and neither does socialism HAVE to be communism.

So can we please bring some actual honesty to the discussion so real progress can be made instead of demonizing both sides. There's good in capitalism and socialism if we can move past demonizing the opposition, as currently both are failing as corruption has twisted and corrupted BOTH everytime they've been tried, this includes hybrids of both.

Capitalism and socialism could both be viable as could hybrids etc IF we could do something about the corruption issue.

Combatting corruption is the discussion we should be having and be the focus. Eliminate corruption, or significantly reduce it and find a way to keep it from getting out of control and whether our new system is socialist or capitalist or a hybrid of both it will work. The problem is neither socialism or capitalism it's rampant corruption getting out of control.

Heck even a king can be a great if there's no corruption. A benevolent dictatorship is often touted as amazing as long as it lasts. Corruption is the issue when someone corrupt takes over after the benevolent king dies or retires.

Corruption is the issue plain and simple.

What's really going on is people are trying to fight corruption and it's #ting on the little guy which is most of the world's population and socialism sells itself as putting the little guy first.

It's not really that people are pro socialism as anti corruption and are just throwing darts at a board trying to hit things that sound like solutions.

All the capitalist vs. socialist argument really breaks down to is one side bitching about corruption strangling the general populace and looking for solutions and the other side bitching that they got theirs and too scared to admit there's a problem or do anything to combat it because they fear losing what they have.

We have a massive corruption issue and unbalanced society. If you all really don't want socialism offer some actual solutions to help combat the legitimate problems in this system and help fix them.

Don't expect the general populace to put up with and accept the corruption and unjust society forever. If you want to protect your stuff start listening and help actually fix the problems or the general populace will attempt to do it for you.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

So you don't give a #, you just wanna throw crap at the wall and see what sticks?


Details matter. Especially when lives and livelihoods are on the line.

a reply to: Puppylove

Wow great post

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: FamCore
Socialism Wants to take my Hard Earned Stuff ? Over their Dead Body Maybe ......

Oh, and even worse, they're going to give it to people who aren't even the same color as you.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Most people don't even know what socialism is. There is no good example of it to point to, so most people just equate it with fascism or communism or some other totalitarian political system.

I think a new plan is needed.

It's unfortunate, I guess, but there will always be a question about what society should do with people who don't technically "produce" anything. They're useless in a true socialist system, because if the citizens/workers own the means of production, then these non-producers are always going to be a huge expense. Some people would simply like to "Ayn Rand" them out and let them starve, but that just increases crime. And if crime increases, then people will want more police, and then we're heading down ol' Totalitarian Road again.

Maybe we'll just have to wait until our technology gets so good that we create a post-scarcity society where everyone pretty much gets what they need (and maybe even what they want) whether they produce or not. Like Star Trek. You can do whatever you want -- including nothing -- but you'll always be guaranteed food, shelter, health care, education, and entertainment. Sure enough, though, some sociopath like Hitler will show up and ruin it all with misguided mythology and racism.

Unless political, economic, religious, and social oppression appeals to these people, it isn't socialism that appeals to them, but the rhetoric and promises of socialists, whom always gain power through propaganda but never fail to ruin the lands they preside over.