People have been brainwashed to believe that socialism is evil...

reply to post by Cabin


I want to commend you, Cabin, for your courage for posting this and I totally understand why you did. I did not live in a former Soviet country but I did at least visit there before its fall. I will never forget the long lines for toilet paper and shampoo. I broke ranks a number of times just so that I could see what my hosts were not showing me. At the same time, I see Capitalism within my own country as potentially failing as a system but we have almost the opposite problem--tons of toilet paper and shampoo but a lot of people may not be able to afford them. These kind of systems will work for a time and I think that part of that may simply be the newness and willingness for that ism to be successful. Eventually, human nature wins over and corruption begins as the intentions that caused the ism change fade away into history. Just a theory as to why both isms appear to be failing because they are both based on ideals.

For socialism to work effectively, then the expectation would be that every individual would be driven to be as productive as possible for the collective good and willing to give up advantage over others for collective good. What I saw when I was in the USSR was still an immense economic disparity where many within Moscow were living in ghetto-like conditions while other Soviets were living in gated homes surrounded by immense gardens. Human nature won out and the logistics of it was failing (hence the shortages of things like toilet paper, soaps, and shampoos). Capitalism was based on ideas that human judgment would somehow dictate the markets in such a way that the greater good would be the inevitability. Smith's "invisible hand", which frequently gets bandied about where, in the aim to please one's customers, one will defer to doing what is best in order to maintain or increase one's market position. However, again, it's logistical failure in that entities grew so large that they dominate markets through multiple brands so that even if one has in ill association, they still have other brands in that same market to pick up the slack. All one has to do in order to see this truth is look at the parent companies on the labels of the food being sold in grocery stores. There's only a handful of companies despite the sheer number of brands. The "invisible hand" requires competition and the deck is stacked against there being any actual competition. Why? Because it's human nature to pursue one's own self interest above all others and the logistics of having to comprehend the impact of one's choices through purchasing is simply too immense to do appropriately in order to control the beast. Really, both systems have failed or are failing because they are on the extreme ends.

Those aspects that we have socialized (roads, police, fire, schools, and etc) are because capitalism failed to meet those particular needs. Once upon a time in the US, you had to pay for fire brigade service. If your home caught fire, the brigades would come out but if you didn't have one of their emblems in your front yard, they would be coming out to watch your home burn to the ground. Abuse of tolls and limiting access to roads was found to be an anathema to liberty, leading to the creation of public roads. We have already added socialist aspects to our democratic capitalist society out of necessity and to preserve liberty and opportunity. Yet, a good portion of society in the US fails to acknowledge that and I agree with Druscilla--it's due to propaganda from the Cold War. The majority of the generations existing in the US experienced that propaganda first hand.

Capitalism and socialism, when placed on a line, are at the two extreme ends.It's been my experience that extreme anything isn't going to work for long. Moderation is best. There are multiple countries that have embraced both with varying degrees of success--Canada, France, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Spain for example. Some have done well surviving the economic chaos post financial crisis--others have not. I personally think that utilizing both systems will guarantee better chances to some extent because it will balance human nature against human need. Where something is socialized, it's socialized for the overall strength of the nation. Where something remains capitalistic, it is to address those drives of desiring advantage and ambition. I'm totally with you on combining the two just as you lined out.

Any form of government or economic system is only as "good" or "evil" as the people running it.

Dominance by the few over the many is, unfortunately, a necessary part of our social evolution.

Will I still be able to self-determine?

Will I still be able to do what I want, make what I want, spend what I want, buy what I want under a different regime?

Will I be able to self-determine? Or will my decisions be made for me?

Will the regime tell me how much I can make?
What I can buy?

Will the regime dictate how I live my life?


________________________

Caveat. I know much of what I wrote now occurs in America. Just look at New York. Guns, soda, salt. . . . the nanny state is alive and flourishing in America.

Call it socialism, fascism, communism, any ism you want!

Is this what we want now?

I'd personally say Socialism is not evil. Even Communism is not evil. In point of fact, to my view, they are the most ideal and perfect forms of Government and social order ever thought up by man.

. . . on paper

It's that implementation through human nature that always seems to fail at some point, early on and turns the People's Paradise into "How the hell did this happen??". Given the track record, as you note, of few to no nations actually making it work in a real world application? I am against continuing to try it. At least anywhere near my nation.

Trial and Error at the real world level of events is so foolhardy a way to operate Government it's staggering to consider. That would seem to be the way many who advocate more socialism in Western nations would see this all happening. Trial and Error to make it all work out...where it's (almost) never worked out before.

(I qualify only because those Northern European nations that do, in many ways, operate in a socialist system seem to make it work among small, like minded populations)

reply to post by Cabin


The thing is, neither extreme works....

Complete socialism....well, someone has to rule, and eventually, those at the top get more and more corrupt, at the expense of everyone else. Because the world also has capitalism, and any nation must deal with other nations, complete socialism never truly exists, and the elite simply become more and more corrupt. Also, there is little incentive for innovation, because there is no payoff.

Complete capitalism has similar problems. The elite get more and more corrupt and greedy. However, there is incentive for innovation, and even a poor man can get a big payoff with innovation. The rich still get richer, and the poor still get poorer.

Thing is, nobody's found a happy medium. Take the recent US effort to socialize medicine for example...because the medical industry is already so capitalist, it is doomed to failure from the start...there simply is no way to socialize this now, in the US. It's going to be a disaster. Medicine should have been socialized a long time ago, with specialists and elective procedures remaining capitalized.

I believe you need a blend of socialism and capitalism for a good functioning society. Absolute needs, and things that require a national bankroll for infrastructure, should be socialized to some extent. For example, a for-profit power company would seem ludicrous to most in Europe. Likewise, most other industries should be capitalist, to promote competition, and innovation (and higher paying jobs).

reply to post by beezzer

When I was a child, I used to hear the stories of people in the USSR waiting in line at the GUM department stores to get staple items. I remember a joke where one person in line asked another what the particular line he was in was waiting to purchase. The other said, I don't know, but they evidently have it, and I will buy some!

Some people at the time said that the stories were just propaganda, but from speaking to former Soviet citizens and people from the Eastern bloc, it was true.

reply to post by pacifier2012


Finland, Sweden, Canada, Norway....think on that.

reply to post by Cabin

I am worn with typing and these exchanges but before I log off and go sit in my garden to have lunch, I am going to tell you that any form of Socialism will come and go as it has in the past and the blood and crushed bodies will in time be forgotten along with those who tried again to go against the way of nature, of survival of the most fit; of what I earn is mine; of The Cream Always Rises To The Top.

Whatever the case, here a crash course on reality for you and others to watch. It is done well enough and may actually open some minds..minds that actually think people like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and the other Super Wealthy support a version of Socialism because they support the Marxist Dream. Even an idiot my realize that while Obama talks the Socialist Rhetoric, he is the Houseboy for those who own and rule this world and there is not a person of color amongst them.

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by Cabin

 

The thing is, neither extreme works....

Complete socialism....well, someone has to rule, and eventually, those at the top get more and more corrupt, at the expense of everyone else. Because the world also has capitalism, and any nation must deal with other nations, complete socialism never truly exists, and the elite simply become more and more corrupt. Also, there is little incentive for innovation, because there is no payoff.

Why does someone "have to rule".
Could it be that this is indicative of the conditioning of which the OP spoke?

We've always had rulers of one sort or another - it doesn't mean that it has to be that way. Rather, it means that there have always been people who seek to set themselves above others to the detriment of all but themselves.

Socialism is evil! I mean come on, anyone who wants the right to be able to tell someone if they can live or die is evil. I mean I think if I have the option to live or to die I want to make that choice on my own. They want to control what we eat and drink. They want to control what we watch on t.v. and at the theatre. What we buy and sell and how buy and sell. Basically they want to control every aspect of our lives. If your okay with that then that makes you a socialist and then that makes you evil as well. I mean do really want the government to control your life? They want our guns and ammo. They want our big gulps and candy bars. Next its going to be our freedom and our lives. That's socialism at its worse. Mayor Bloomberg is having a ball in New York controlling ppls lives. And our president thinks just like him. He wants to control us too. Ppl will see what I'm talking about one of these day. When they can't take a crap without being told what kind of toilet paper to use.

Originally posted by sc1981
Socialism is evil! I mean come on, anyone who wants the right to be able to tell someone if they can live or die is evil. I mean I think if I have the option to live or to die I want to make that choice on my own. They want to control what we eat and drink. They want to control what we watch on t.v. and at the theatre. What we buy and sell and how buy and sell. Basically they want to control every aspect of our lives. If your okay with that then that makes you a socialist and then that makes you evil as well. I mean do really want the government to control your life? They want our guns and ammo. They want our big gulps and candy bars. Next its going to be our freedom and our lives. That's socialism at its worse. Mayor Bloomberg is having a ball in New York controlling ppls lives. And our president thinks just like him. He wants to control us too. Ppl will see what I'm talking about one of these day. When they can't take a crap without being told what kind of toilet paper to use.

This may be the worst interpretation of socialism that I've ever seen.

Socialism does not equate to government, the fact that you think it does shows that you believe the tripe put forth by corporations and their media.

Corporations, their media and their cronies in government are terrified of socialism because if it ever took a hold in it's proper form it would rob them of the power which they hold over you.

Originally posted by beezzer
Will I still be able to self-determine?

Will I still be able to do what I want, make what I want, spend what I want, buy what I want under a different regime?

Will I be able to self-determine? Or will my decisions be made for me?

Will the regime tell me how much I can make?
What I can buy?

Will the regime dictate how I live my life?

Do you have the ability to do any of these things now? Really, what makes you think you have the ability to "self determine" right now? Think about this real hard and try not to give me any straw man answers/arguments.

Example: Do you have the ability to choose whether or not to wear clothes at all times? Do have the ability to choose whether or not to eat or drink?

So, you are restricted both biologically and socially. So tell me again what freedoms you really have.

Economically speaking, the answer to your questions lies in the fact that there is only so much room at the top of the pyramid built by capitalism.

How many people were brainwashed into believeing it was ''Good'' ? how many millions died proving it wasnt ? Every generation you see another bunch of naive morons saying ,''Why cant we give it just one more try '' OMG cant these Idiots read history books ! Move to North Korea and help them with a more ''Workable'' version of it and see where it gets you HMMMM, dont worry the NWO has its New Worldwide version ''coming into view'' for you !!! one in which ,you CANNOT escape to another Free country to get away from, because they will all be equally BAD !!!

Historically socialism has not proved itself. All the countries that have tried it, have failed

Your post is a little conflicted if you ask me. You are from a former Soviet country, so I assume you grew up with some form of either Socialism or Communism. Do you feel that you were brainwashed from birth to want Socialism by your circumstances, and so people who were born and raised in Capitalistic countries are brainwashed to hate Socialism?
Like another poster here said, even the States instituted Socialistic programs, and so most of us alive now grew up with one form of Social welfare program or another. People who want full-on Socialism blame Capitalism for the problems of society, and yet the systems have been mixed up enough it would be hard to tell exactly what was doing what, which of course is what Fabian Socialism does, it mixes things up enough people don't know what it would be like to live under a pure system. Socialists keep saying if we just add these other new programs(Obamacare is the most recent one here) then things would get much better.

Getting rid of Capitalism and instituting more Socialist programs will not fix society. As you have said, it has never worked anywhere and the former Soviet Communist bloc and it's failures ought to be warning enough, but some people still think they can do it better than the Politburo...

I would add that the NWO which is what we are getting now is neither right nor left but a synthesis, as Antony Sutton explained.

No form of government is inherently evil. Humans make every form of government evil.

Originally posted by yadda333

Do you have the ability to do any of these things now? Really, what makes you think you have the ability to "self determine" right now? Think about this real hard and try not to give me any straw man answers/arguments.

Yes. I can choose to work or not. I can buy what I want. Spend what I want. We all live under laws. I can't buy a baby panda or a human being. But that's what we're talking about. How restrictive do we want these laws to be?
I can choose my profession. I can demand a salary based on my skills within my profession. I can spend my money that I earn on what I choose.

Example: Do you have the ability to choose whether or not to wear clothes at all times? Do have the ability to choose whether or not to eat or drink?

You ask me not to use straw-man arguments, yet bring straw-man arguments as an example? I also don't have the ability to fly or use Jedi mind-melds!

So, you are restricted both biologically and socially. So tell me again what freedoms you really have.

Economically speaking, the answer to your questions lies in the fact that there is only so much room at the top of the pyramid built by capitalism.

edit on 3/8/2013 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)

You never answered my question.

Am I free, under a socialist regime, to self-determine?

Originally posted by sc1981
Socialism is evil! I mean come on, anyone who wants the right to be able to tell someone if they can live or die is evil. I mean I think if I have the option to live or to die I want to make that choice on my own. They want to control what we eat and drink. They want to control what we watch on t.v. and at the theatre. What we buy and sell and how buy and sell. Basically they want to control every aspect of our lives. If your okay with that then that makes you a socialist and then that makes you evil as well. I mean do really want the government to control your life? They want our guns and ammo. They want our big gulps and candy bars. Next its going to be our freedom and our lives. That's socialism at its worse. Mayor Bloomberg is having a ball in New York controlling ppls lives. And our president thinks just like him. He wants to control us too. Ppl will see what I'm talking about one of these day. When they can't take a crap without being told what kind of toilet paper to use.

The problem and why Socialism keeps coming back and cycling around for a new push ever couple generations it seems, is that your description is what socialism becomes. It's never what the people who advocate socialism describe it as being and I honestly don't think many believe themselves it'll become that.

Star Trek is socialism, when you really stop for a moment and think about it. That is the Utopia that no one in our lifetimes will ever even get on the right path to achieving. Human nature is just a bit too base and dark right now to even joke about it working that way, in a positive outcome. However, Star Trek is what I think the people pushing for Socialism foresee THEIR attempt becoming ...because they can make it work where no one else has. I think that arrogance is part of what makes it fail, too. Like clockwork.

reply to post by budski


Socialist govts don't tell people what they can or cannot eat? Try Michelle Obama telling McD they can't have Happy Meals and that they have to change what's in the food they sell...no trans fats my dear... tell me why Michelle is getting away with forcing schools to have black bean salad which the kids likely won't eat anyway? Nope, public school is already a socialist plan and the Socialists in Chief are telling schools what they can and cannot serve. It may be on a more subtle level than what we thought was going on in former Communist countries, but therein lies the real evil. Therein lies the lie of the serpent, the trickery, "You shall not SURELY die".
So we now have food police going around forcing children to eat McD chicken nuggets now instead of Mom's homemade sandwich, and this after they forced McD to get rid of all the transfat.
Then we have that fascist over in New York literally making it illegal to have sodas over a certain size. Please, tell me you don't think that is a free society.
Before you tell me that's right wing, I challenge you to prove that telling people what they can and cannot eat isn't exactly what Mussolini called it, Totalitarianism, a LEFT wing system.

So your telling me that a government can't be socialist? That socialism only consist of big powerful companies around the globe? And those companies control everything we do? Because that's exactly what socialism is to me. Muslim countries are socialist because they every little thing that their ppl do. So yeah your trying to tell me that that is incorrect. That Obama and his cronies aren't socialist. I beg to differ. That's why Cuba is like it is. Its a socialist country. You can barely have the internet there. And anyone that does have they're watched like a chicken hawk watching a chicken. But maybe I've got the meaning of socialism wrong. Maybe I'll look that up and make sure.

reply to post by beezzer


I did not use a straw man as my example was obvious for the sake of clarity. I've already addressed the fact that you have no free will as you are unconsciously interpellated by the Ideological State Apparatus (page 4).

A better question, which I thought I had included, is do we all have the ability to self determine? Of course not, and the reason is because capitalism does not benefit the whole of humanity.