What's your stance on socialism?

[Taleweaver]

I admit I'm hesitant to post this, but I'm honestly curious, and it's certainly a relevant item nowadays. Reason: Bernie Sanders has currently established a wide advantage over his democratic rivals. So...there's that.

Bernie Sanders is also a socialist, which is pretty uncommon (if not to say: extremely rare) in the United States. And from what I can tell: just about unique.

So let's start with some simple politics: what is socialism, exactly? Well...google defines it (correctly) as "any system in which the production and distribution of goods and services is a shared responsibility of a group of people."

Whether it's something for you is something I've been described with bread. My apologies if I don't recall it correctly, but it was something like this:

A bread has been baked. Who owns it?

Communism: the state in which the bread was baked
Socialism: the baker, the baker boy and anyone else who helped baking it
Liberalism: the baker, even if he hasn't touched it himself
Capitalism: whomever pays the most for the bread
Neocon capitalism: the free market

At the very least, it illustrates the difference between communism and socialism (I've seen Americans who couldn't tell the difference but thought they knew what it meant regardless). But even so, there's some differences in how to pursue it. For simplicity's sake (and because I'm no expert on the matter, though I'm a half-assed socialist myself ) I'll put them on a sliding scale between what I would call "Scandinavian socialism" and "Fox news socialism".

Scandinavian socialism is the kind practiced in Finland, Sweden and Denmark. It has a strong state that is in service to its citizens. It has strong worker unions, taxes that redistribute the wealth to those who need it most and things like universal health care. I've read that it's the type Sanders seeks to implement, but I've got to admit I'm not too familiar with his plans yet at this point.
Fox news socialism seeks to eliminate all personal possessions and put a strong emphasis on taxes (especially estate taxes) to the point where every yahoo has the same benefits as those working their asses off each day. I call it that because it's the kind fox news conjures when they describe socialism.

...but since fox viewers aren't going to consider voting Bernie, I'll kindly ignore them for this thread (okay, okay: I'll give them a voting option ).

So...what are your opinions?


I'd say "please no flaming", but I suspect it'll be unavoidable after some pages. Still: please no flaming.

 

[erikas]

I think at this point Trump will be getting 4 more years regardelss of what democrats do.

 

[FGFlann]

In the bread example you provide, on the capitalist end of the spectrum the bread is owned by the baker in all instances unless the baker themself is an employee of a larger body that provides them the resources to make the bread. They have the option of selling the bread or giving it away, but otherwise only crime or the use of force can take that bread away from them.

Tangentially, I will say this to Trump voters: Underestimate Bernie at your peril. Complacency and arrogance were the factors that allowed to Trump to cause the upset he did in the first place. The irony of falling into that trap now would be enormous.

 

[Jaxom]

From what I could say from France, a bit of socialism could benefit to the USA, as for every way of dealing with society, it has to be done with balance in mind. Socialism is based on redistributing money to protect the less wealthy, but I think too much socialism can kill the will of certain people to work.

I heard a large panel of elders saying that the decades of socialism in France helped creating a society of assisted peoples with no will of working or doing things outside their immediate reach (understand => a couch). As I wasn't born in these years, I can only tell about what I saw and heard, but I've already seen some people abusing the system.

Unfortunately, our current president seems eager to destroy everything done by socialism and social manifestations, but this could throw many peoples in the reaches of poverty. That's what the "Yellow Jackets" are fighting for, protecting the poorest from being totally abandoned by the system. I'm not fond of politic, but I can understand people willing to protect their elders, family, friends, neighbors or even strangers from that. What our government isn't willing to see... What a "project" for our country...

 

[Eredhel]

I wouldn't vote for a socialist party, based on what they did here in Latin America for these past 20 years. And I know how to manage my own money, I don't trust any politician with my property. But anyway, I should not extend my vision on this matter since I'm a libertarian and some might see me as an extremist (Hermann Hoppe Libertarian, I mean)

 

[CORE]

Basic Human rights...

Free Health Care.
Food in Belly.
Roof OverHead.
Clothes on Back.
Income enough to get you by.
Thrift Stores and Refurbished Goods.

Want A Better Life Work For It just like everyone else.

That my views on Socialism excluding the corrupt elites trying to sell it for they're own personal gain a better world is possible.

 

[0x3000027E]

Socialism: the baker, the baker boy and anyone else who helped baking it
This is incomplete. You forgot the essential role of the government in the socialist system, which decides how much bread is produced, how it is produced, and how much it will sell for on the market. They also assign a percentage of ownership that is arbitrary, but enough to maintain their power.

 

[osaka35]

Bernie is a social democrat, not a socialist. It's a "social when it makes sense, a fair and human-centered free-market when that makes sense" perspective. So think FDR and the new deal, because that's what we're talking about here.

It helps pointing out we already have a lot of socialism. Firefighters, for example. We used to have to pay a fee to local fire fighters a long long time ago. If you didn't pay that month, they would literally just watch your house burn instead of save it. After some folks died, they figured it was dumb and unethical to apply the free market to fighting fires, and so now they're a public service rather than a function of the free market. That's social democracy.

Good rule of thumb, something that's a "public service" can be thought of as a socialist thing, as far as this topic is concerned. Roads, public education, etc, are at least partly socialist in how they function. I mean, when people say they hate socialism, i have to wonder where they're getting their misinformation or what they think it is.

Really, the issue in the states is one of non-transparency and corruption. Socialist ideals are perfectly fine, just as the free-market with a level playing field is perfectly fine, it's just about ensuring the power resides with the informed people and not corporations or super rich or unnacountable/hidden people in government. Both methods should be used, where it makes sense, and corporations/the super rich shouldn't be in charge of deciding when it does make sense. That's Bernie's platform, basically.

By the way, bernie is also fighting for the stuff other people claim they're doing but aren't. To "drain the swamp" made larger and deadlier by many of those in power, and for common sense (read:human-focused decisions) to lead the way rather than petulance or profit. So. Yeah. Go social democrat.

I wouldn't vote for a socialist party, based on what they did here in Latin America for these past 20 years. And I know how to manage my own money, I don't trust any politician with my property. But anyway, I should not extend my vision on this matter since I'm a libertarian and some might see me as an extremist (Hermann Hoppe Libertarian, I mean)

Latin America has corruption issues. Doesn't matter what system you have there, a corrupt one will be bad news. Blame the corruption and lack of strength the people have when it comes to government decisions.

 

[Kraken_X]

I would look Bernie's policies, and not let the "Socialism" label cloud your judgement. Fox news called Obama a socialist and he would be considered right of center in most countries.

Small businesses in the USA struggle to provide healthcare to their employees, limiting their creation and growth. Workers are forced to work for companies that they hate (or marriages they no longer want) just to keep health insurance. When they actually use the health insurance, they are forced to go to specific in-network doctors and facilities, and then they still end up paying more out of pocket than they would if they lived in a country with no healthcare system at all. If one of the doctors is out of network and sees them without their consent, they go bankrupt or lose their home. More people die from preventable disease in the USA every day than from violent crime, terrorism and war combined. People don't see the doctor when they are sick, because they don't have paid sick leave and can't afford the bill.

Automation is going to eliminate most jobs in the coming decades, especially the low skill ones. We need a way for people whose jobs have been eliminated to be retrained to do something else. Getting a house worth of student loan debt isn't the way to achieve the American dream. One of America's greatest advantages has been an intelligent population. There is a reason why most of the major inventions started here. But in the last few decades, the USA has lost that edge.

Corruption is rampant. Bribing congress is the #1 return on investment for most businesses, ahead of R&D and actually providing a product. In virtually every industry, 2-3 companies dominate using advantages that they have given themselves through regulation and buying up any upcoming threat and killing it. Under Trump, we lost Net Neutrality, and the number of cell phone carriers went from 4 to 3. Fox news attacks all regulation, but in reality regulation is just a tool that can be good or bad, but has been wielded to benefit monopolies, not society. Because "money is speech, and larger companies have more speech".

How do we pay for programs that actually benefit society like universal healthcare and free education? The same way we paid for trillions of dollars in tax cuts for the 1% and decades of losing unprovoked wars. About 10% of every paycheck goes directly to the military, which consists of more than 60% of all government spending (not including social security and medicare, which are subtracted separately). Nobody besides Bernie is going to stand up the Military Industrial Complex and start using our tax dollars for things that actually benefit society.

American democracy is about to collapse. Trump is basically above the law. The department of justice and the courts can't prosecute a sitting president and the Senate will not convict no matter what he does wrong. He can pardon any of his underlings who get caught. He is stacking the intelligence committees with yes-men that he can send to investigate his opponent and direct to ignore his wrongdoings. He has already gutted the department of justice. The only thing he is accountable to is our votes, and McConnell in the senate has blocked all bills to secure voting machines and prevent fraud in the election process. If Trump gets another 4 years, the damage likely can not be undone.

 

[SG854]

I admit I'm hesitant to post this, but I'm honestly curious, and it's certainly a relevant item nowadays. Reason: Bernie Sanders has currently established a wide advantage over his democratic rivals. So...there's that.

Bernie Sanders is also a socialist, which is pretty uncommon (if not to say: extremely rare) in the United States. And from what I can tell: just about unique.

So let's start with some simple politics: what is socialism, exactly? Well...google defines it (correctly) as "any system in which the production and distribution of goods and services is a shared responsibility of a group of people."

Whether it's something for you is something I've been described with bread. My apologies if I don't recall it correctly, but it was something like this:



At the very least, it illustrates the difference between communism and socialism (I've seen Americans who couldn't tell the difference but thought they knew what it meant regardless). But even so, there's some differences in how to pursue it. For simplicity's sake (and because I'm no expert on the matter, though I'm a half-assed socialist myself ) I'll put them on a sliding scale between what I would call "Scandinavian socialism" and "Fox news socialism".

Scandinavian socialism is the kind practiced in Finland, Sweden and Denmark. It has a strong state that is in service to its citizens. It has strong worker unions, taxes that redistribute the wealth to those who need it most and things like universal health care. I've read that it's the type Sanders seeks to implement, but I've got to admit I'm not too familiar with his plans yet at this point.
Fox news socialism seeks to eliminate all personal possessions and put a strong emphasis on taxes (especially estate taxes) to the point where every yahoo has the same benefits as those working their asses off each day. I call it that because it's the kind fox news conjures when they describe socialism.

...but since fox viewers aren't going to consider voting Bernie, I'll kindly ignore them for this thread (okay, okay: I'll give them a voting option ).

So...what are your opinions?


I'd say "please no flaming", but I suspect it'll be unavoidable after some pages. Still: please no flaming.

Your descriptions of Socialism and Capitalism is weird. It makes it seem like the Baker still owns the Bread after I buy it in Socialism. Its like me buying a Video game and Capcom still claims ownership, and 20 years after they come and take all my Capcom games because they say its mine I own it not you.

Or a different take on the way you describe it its like steps of process Bread goes through rather then the different systems. Like your description makes it seem like Socialism is one of the first steps in the ownership process Bread goes through, they Bake it they own it. Then Capitalism is the next process once ownership is relinquished from the Store owner when I purchase the Bread and it becomes mine to own and mine to eat. The store owner or Capcom can no longer claim its theirs and take it from me once I buy it.

Kind of like the scientific method, first step make a Hypothesis, next step do research. That's like your description of Socialism and Capitalism rather then distinguished them as different systems. First step is Socialism then next step is Capitalism.

Your not really doing a good job distinguishing the two in that grey box of yours.

 

[0x3000027E]

By the way, bernie is also fighting for the stuff other people claim they're doing but aren't. To "drain the swamp" made larger and deadlier by many of those in power, and for common sense to lead the way rather than petulance or profit. So. Yeah. Go social democrat.

Great response, although this 'common sense' line is low effort.

 

[FGFlann]

Its like me buying a Video game and Capcom still claims ownership, and 20 years after and they come and take all my Capcom games because they say its mine I own it not you.

What should scare us all is that this is the potential reality of the modern digital video game market.

 

[SG854]

What should scare us all is that this is the potential reality of the modern digital video game market.

Its like digital copies is like Socialism and Physical copies are Capitalism with his description. With digital games Sony claims ownership/Soicalism of those digital copies and can choose to close the digital store whenever they want, and once the store closes down you can no longer download the games. With capitalism physical game copies are yours to own and Sony can no longer shut down the store and prevent access to that game.

There are ways around it like making multiple copies to a hard drives so you wont loose it, just like eating the bread you purchase means the baker can no longer claim ownership since there is no bread existing to own, its in your digestive system. Unless they want to claim ownership on the brown stuff that comes out of my rear end. But that's how he describes the two systems in that grey box summary and I don't think are good descriptions.

 

[0x3000027E]

Bernie Sanders is also a socialist, which is pretty uncommon (if not to say: extremely rare) in the United States. And from what I can tell: just about unique.

This isn't really as revolutionary as you think it is.
The US has a system of 'checks and balances' that keeps these powers in check.
Also, as far as Sanders' economic policies, it is congress that appropriates funds, not the president. The best Sanders can do is push a bill towards congress and hope for the best.

 

[smf]

The people who demonize socialism are the ones who knowingly benefit from capitalism to the detriment of others. There are pros and cons to both of course.

No socialist is worse for America than Trump. People who voted for Trump deserve the swamp he's created.

 

[0x3000027E]

The people who demonize socialism are the ones who knowingly benefit from capitalism to the detriment of others.

Anyone who criticizes (demonizes) socialism knowingly benefit from capitalism to the detriment of others? What!?
Come on, you're better than this. I'll give you a chance to edit.

 

[SG854]

This isn't really as revolutionary as you think it is.
The US has a system of 'checks and balances' that keeps these powers in check.
Also, as far as Sanders' economic policies, it is congress that appropriates funds, not the president. The best Sanders can do is push a bill towards congress and hope for the best.

Ya, some of his OP stuff is weird. Is it really unique in the States. We have a bunch of Social programs. So is Socialism all that rare in the states? The labeling of Sanders may be rare, but the execution of those policies isn't all that rare. The Difference is that U.S. handles it different then other countries, and Bernie wants to allocate more money to them and have more state dependence rather then independence, because he believes people are being prevented from being independent in our current system. Kind of like having a Hero to save us because we aren't strong enough to do this stuff on our own to tackle the big bad corporations, so we become dependent on this Hero, that's how he envisions it, him being that Hero. And the Political Parties in the states argue how much money must be allocated to these social programs through taxes.

 

[spotanjo3]

i don't support any political party. All politicians are crooks. Corruption is everywhere. DONT TRUST THEM. I repeat... they're all corrupt. NO VOTE FOR THEM!!!

 

[0x3000027E]

i don't support any political party. All politicians are crooks. Corruption is everywhere. DONT TRUST THEM. NONE!

While a bit crude, this is a welcomed response.
We should all be very critical of our political leaders, all of the time. We should hold them under great scrutiny and watch them under a microscope. They are, in fact, our servants and our representatives.

 

[spotanjo3]

While a bit crude, this is a welcomed response.
We should all be very critical of our political leaders, all of the time. We should hold them under great scrutiny and watch them under a microscope. They are, in fact, our servants and our representatives.

What ? Are you kidding me ? Heck no. They are not our servants and our representatives. They ruin our lives.. Always was and always will be. Look at the cost of living and higher tax ? They are cruel!