Something people often forget about socialism

One thing people often forget about socialism is how many different varieties there are of it.

Of course everyone knows about Marxism, but there are many different kinds of Marxism, which are usually named after some famous leftist mass murderer such as Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, and Trotskyism.

There are all kinds of socialism based on religion. Christian socialism is probably the most well known. The guy who wrote the pledge of allegiance was a Christian socialist. Another kind is Islamic socialism, which blends socialism with the principles of Islam, using the Quran as a guide.

Socialism can be imbued with environmentalism. Green or Eco socialists believe having public control over the means of production and distribution will lead to a cleaner environment.

Socialism can be classified based on the speed it is to be imposed. Revolutionary socialists believe it should be imposed quickly, while Fabian socialists believed it should be imposed slowly and gradually over time.

While socialism is often authoritarian and coercive, it doesn’t have to be. The Kibbutz was and still is voluntary, as was the commune that kicked out Bernie Sanders because he’s a lazy piece of shit who never did an honest day’s work in his life. In between authoritarian socialism and voluntary socialism is Democratic socialism, where socialism is imposed via the democratic process.

A new variety of socialism doesn’t even need a name. Xi Jinping calls his version Socialism with Chinese characteristics, whatever tf that means.

What constitutes socialism is a high degree of public control over the means of production and distribution. Once you have that, you can add in just about anything else you want.

 

[reflechissez]

Great thread, wundumho.

 

[Schism]

Something else most people don't know about socialism is that it's hard to keep those brownshirts clean.

 

[NatMorton]

Another common thread of nearly all forms of socialism is that they have great difficulty preserving personal liberty. The needs of the state always seem to outweigh the needs of the individual.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Central planning, especially when dealing with monopolies (such as the federal government), is only as good (mediocre or bad) as the central planner(s).

Those who tout the wonders of US (federal) single-payer (M4A will be oh so wonderful, cost efficient and well managed) systems need look no further than the DoD and their rich brothers, the defense contractors, often called the Military Industrial Complex.

SNAP is also a single-payer (but not socialist?), income redistribution program, yet its only method of cost control is the rationing (limitation) of benefits. Some will, no doubt, claim that SNAP is not socialist at all since it pays grocery providers their full retail asking price including whatever profit they deem is necessary.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Another thing many people dont know about Socialism:

Socialism is what Albert Einstein said we should have!
And thats a MIGHTY BIG ENDORSEMENT right there!

I'd be willing...nay EAGER to give Socialism a whirl! I think it would be OK. I surely have ZERO complaints about my Socialist BidenCare™ plan. ZERO premiums, ZERO deductibles....I just saved a TON of money on my health insurance and I LIKE it!!!!
Socialism? WHERE DO I SIGN?!?!?

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Another common thread of nearly all forms of socialism is that they have great difficulty preserving personal liberty. The needs of the state always seem to outweigh the needs of the individual.

You must mean like the way the US has gnarlee Healthcare FrEeDuMbZ$™?

meh. I dont think I'd miss that too much. 🤷‍♂️

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Central planning, especially when dealing with monopolies (such as the federal government), is only as good (mediocre or bad) as the central planner(s).

Those who tout the wonders of US (federal) single-payer (M4A will be oh so wonderful, cost efficient and well managed) systems need look no further than the DoD and their rich brothers, the defense contractors, often called the Military Industrial Complex.

SNAP is also a single-payer (but not socialist?), income redistribution program, yet its only method of cost control is the rationing (limitation) of benefits. Some will, no doubt, claim that SNAP is not socialist at all since it pays grocery providers their full retail asking price including whatever profit they deem is necessary.

Thats not very convincing right there TT. I'm not persuaded by that.

 

[NatMorton]

... FrEeDuMbZ$™?

That line wasn't funny any of the first six or seven times you used it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Thats not very convincing right there TT. I'm not persuaded by that.

Of course, you aren’t. You constantly brag about getting your “free” (meaning totally paid for by others) BidenCare - which you qualified for by doing ???.

From each according to their ability (to pay more taxes), to each according to their need (for more public assistance).

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Of course, you aren’t. You constantly brag about getting your “free” (meaning totally paid for by others) BidenCare - which you qualified for by doing ???.

From each according to their ability (to pay more taxes), to each according to their need (for more public assistance).

You and Rush Limpbawls say its bad.....Albert Einstein says its good.

Hmmmmm.....who to believe?

 

[Integrityrespec]

Another common thread of nearly all forms of socialism is that they have great difficulty preserving personal liberty. The needs of the state always seem to outweigh the needs of the individual.

And there is always a ruling class at the top.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

And there is always a ruling class at the top.

Theres nothing like that in a place like the USA. A place that has such abundant FrEeDuMbZ$™.
There is no "ruling class". The government is totally controlled by the broke Johnny Lunchbuckets.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

...Am I having a stroke right now? I'm not sure I believe my eyes right now.

 

[Peter King]

I am a social democrat. I do not care about socialist nonsense like class battle, I am a Dutch social democrat, I believe in cooperation instead of struggle. We Dutch call it "polderen" (polderen is traditionally how we gained land by putting dykes around an area and then pumping out the water) but the Dutch current polderen means that rather than fighting one another, we negotiate between the government, the business industry/employers and the workers/unions. Say the workers want a 6% pay rise, the government and employers do not want to go to that number so they negotiate until all parties agree and that will be the base pay rise.

That way there are no strikes, no protests, etc. etc. etc. and no negative feelings as all got part of what they desired. But to achieve that all parties need to be willing to negotiate and compromise. So the best English word for polderen might be willingness to compromise by all parties for the greater prosperity for all.

And as a social democrat I am fine with that. You cannot fight to the death on all subjects. So because parties are willing to negotiate and compromise, even in politics, social democrats can be in a government with fiscal conservatives (but social libertarian like views).

As a social democrat I want fair social safety nets which are almost fully paid with an insurance payment, everybody pays a little bit into the safety net so that if needed you can apply for it. Just like you have a car insurance, health insurance or house insurance, you have unemployment insurance, old age pension insurance and disability insurance.

I don't want government ownership of anything that private business can also do. And it can usually been done better by private businesses. Just have good regulation to which these companies have to comply with and the rest should be decisions by the companies itself.

Taxes need to be fair, you don't to punish success but they have to pay their fair share. All that international workers unite is something I do not believe in, don't care for and think people should be mostly allowed to live their lives as free as possible. I have no desire to interfere in the bedroom of people or private property. I just don't do that old conservative socialism. I don't like socialist.

The Dutch socialist want to stop global trade (which I don't believe in, nationalism for the sake of nationalism is bull crap), they want to leave NATO (screw them on that too, again global cooperation between the "good guys" is not a bad thing) and more of that old style commie crap.

 

[ChickenTendies]

Aneurysm

 

[Grim17]

I am a social democrat. I do not care about socialist nonsense like class battle, I am a Dutch social democrat, I believe in cooperation instead of struggle. We Dutch call it "polderen" (polderen is traditionally how we gained land by putting dykes around an area and then pumping out the water) but the Dutch current polderen means that rather than fighting one another, we negotiate between the government, the business industry/employers and the workers/unions. Say the workers want a 6% pay rise, the government and employers do not want to go to that number so they negotiate until all parties agree and that will be the base pay rise.

That way there are no strikes, no protests, etc. etc. etc. and no negative feelings as all got part of what they desired. But to achieve that all parties need to be willing to negotiate and compromise. So the best English word for polderen might be willingness to compromise by all parties for the greater prosperity for all.

And as a social democrat I am fine with that. You cannot fight to the death on all subjects. So because parties are willing to negotiate and compromise, even in politics, social democrats can be in a government with fiscal conservatives (but social libertarian like views).

As a social democrat I want fair social safety nets which are almost fully paid with an insurance payment, everybody pays a little bit into the safety net so that if needed you can apply for it. Just like you have a car insurance, health insurance or house insurance, you have unemployment insurance, old age pension insurance and disability insurance.

I don't want government ownership of anything that private business can also do. And it can usually been done better by private businesses. Just have good regulation to which these companies have to comply with and the rest should be decisions by the companies itself.

Taxes need to be fair, you don't to punish success but they have to pay their fair share. All that international workers unite is something I do not believe in, don't care for and think people should be mostly allowed to live their lives as free as possible. I have no desire to interfere in the bedroom of people or private property. I just don't do that old conservative socialism. I don't like socialist.

The Dutch socialist want to stop global trade (which I don't believe in, nationalism for the sake of nationalism is bull crap), they want to leave NATO (screw them on that too, again global cooperation between the "good guys" is not a bad thing) and more of that old style commie crap.

Putting my personal opposition to socialism aside, people in the US will never approve of implementing the socialist policies that exist in the Netherlands based on the increased taxes alone. More than half of all families in the US pay no federal income taxes and when they learn it requires every single family and income earner there to pay half their earnings to the government, that will be the end of it. There's just no way people in the lower middle class and below will accept going from paying 0 federal taxes per year, to paying 10's of thousands. It would financially destroy them.

.

 

[Peter King]

Putting my personal opposition to socialism aside, people in the US will never approve of implementing the socialist policies that exist in the Netherlands based on the increased taxes alone. More than half of all families in the US pay no federal income taxes and when they learn it requires every single family and income earner there to pay half their earnings to the government, that will be the end of it. There's just no way people in the lower middle class and below will accept going from paying 0 federal taxes per year, to paying 10's of thousands. It would financially destroy them.

.

Hey, I am unable to work due as I have disability pay, but I pay federal taxes, local and sales taxes. And proud of it, paying taxes for the betterment of society is a prize I am willing to pay.

 

[ChickenTendies]

I am a social democrat. I do not care about socialist nonsense like class battle, I am a Dutch social democrat, I believe in cooperation instead of struggle. We Dutch call it "polderen" (polderen is traditionally how we gained land by putting dykes around an area and then pumping out the water) but the Dutch current polderen means that rather than fighting one another, we negotiate between the government, the business industry/employers and the workers/unions. Say the workers want a 6% pay rise, the government and employers do not want to go to that number so they negotiate until all parties agree and that will be the base pay rise.

That way there are no strikes, no protests, etc. etc. etc. and no negative feelings as all got part of what they desired. But to achieve that all parties need to be willing to negotiate and compromise. So the best English word for polderen might be willingness to compromise by all parties for the greater prosperity for all.

And as a social democrat I am fine with that. You cannot fight to the death on all subjects. So because parties are willing to negotiate and compromise, even in politics, social democrats can be in a government with fiscal conservatives (but social libertarian like views).

As a social democrat I want fair social safety nets which are almost fully paid with an insurance payment, everybody pays a little bit into the safety net so that if needed you can apply for it. Just like you have a car insurance, health insurance or house insurance, you have unemployment insurance, old age pension insurance and disability insurance.

I don't want government ownership of anything that private business can also do. And it can usually been done better by private businesses. Just have good regulation to which these companies have to comply with and the rest should be decisions by the companies itself.

Taxes need to be fair, you don't to punish success but they have to pay their fair share. All that international workers unite is something I do not believe in, don't care for and think people should be mostly allowed to live their lives as free as possible. I have no desire to interfere in the bedroom of people or private property. I just don't do that old conservative socialism. I don't like socialist.

The Dutch socialist want to stop global trade (which I don't believe in, nationalism for the sake of nationalism is bull crap), they want to leave NATO (screw them on that too, again global cooperation between the "good guys" is not a bad thing) and more of that old style commie crap.

Bruh. And you wonder why the VVD has been winning since 2010.

 

[Peter King]

Bruh. And you wonder why the VVD has been winning since 2010.

Because we like to balance our budget and because they had the most likeable leader. Most political might lives in the center so you cannot go without the VVD. It is always VVD with left center or VVD with right center.

 

[ChickenTendies]

Because we like to balance our budget and because they had the most likeable leader. Most political might lives in the center so you cannot go without the VVD. It is always VVD with left center or VVD with right center.

It's because left of center parties and "Grand Coalitions" always favor incrementalism and after decades of this, voters get disillusioned by the political establishment and eternal compromise. That's why right wing parties have seen a resurgence.

 

[Peter King]

It's because left of center parties and "Grand Coalitions" always favor incrementalism and after decades of this, voters get disillusioned by the political establishment and eternal compromise. That's why right wing parties have seen a resurgence.

It is more like the left got punished because it chose to do the right thing at the right time (and with left I mean the PvdA). The only one who had the guts to solve the big cost of unemployment benefits by limiting the length and the size of the unemployment benefits. The PvdA and the VVD made that possible, the PvdA was punished for it by a lot of their followers moving to populist parties.

But the PvdA did the right thing, it was getting too expensive at that point and steps had to be taken. Governing is sometimes making the right decision even if it costs you votes. I approved of the measure but if you have left wing and right wing populist parties who can should whatever they want, claim what they want and propose whatever ludicrous things they want, serious parties suffer less voters. But these populists know they can shout whatever they want because the center parties will always win enough seats to rule, they cannot negotiate with the populist parties because in all reality those parties don't want to compromise because then they will have to put their money were their mouths are, compromising their positions and no longer being able to shout whatever they want.

 

[ChickenTendies]

Yeah why not balance the budget on the backs of the unemployed.

 

[soloanarchy]

It does help with weight loss across the population

 

[uptower]

Oh so it’s not just an insult to fling at anyone we disagree with?

There was me thinking gun regulation, abortion, a critical press, CRT, a living wage, being gay and practicing yoga all constitute ‘socialism’. Gee, I had it wrong the whole time...