• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What is socialism?

V.I. Lenin said:
Socialism is the best idea for your conscience.

Capitalism is the best idea for your wallet.

What's rather funny is that the poor man has no wallet, and the rich man has no conscience.
 
128shot said:
Well, define work. I'm sure they work somewhere, some how, in some way, to keep on reaping profits.


Management is a nessarcy skill weither you believe that or not...

The rich are employers. The workers are employees to put it simpler. And what I said before was over-simplified.

Another thing capitalism teaches people, manement is always necessary, which I quite doubt. Just another thing that is believed to make it seem capitalism is the best economic system.
 
Comrade Brian said:
What's rather funny is that the poor man has no wallet, and the rich man has no conscience.


Its rather funny, because this is not true.

Rich men have historically been the biggest donators in history when obviously, they don't have to be.


It is also funny, that there is a need for management,

what do you think the government does under socialism?
 
And what are their donations in percentages of their wealth? They can afford to donate higher percentages than anyone else. Why do they deserve so much wealth? They don't work. Many are born into it. What governments do under socialism varies.
 
and what says they can't amass so much wealth that it makes you so jealous you feel you need to steal it?


Nothing, absolutely nothing.
 
sorry that I'm just jumping in, but i think we should have a sort of British style of inheritance(this might seem of subject but stick with me). OK the British have a system that only allows a certain amount of money to be left to your children. Now if we had this system then we wouldn't have all these rich people who never had to work a day in there life(i.e. people like the Baldwins). Now this would actually solve some problems, if you are willing to sacrifice your inheritance over a certain point, it would by no means leave your poor if your parents died. It would one make people actually work for there living and give them a stake in society. It would make everyman a member of the working class, now admittedly there would be some rich people who would simply invest there money but at least they are actually doing something not just riding daddy's coat tails. Now this would actually give a good amount of money to the state without raising taxes, and it would not in any way hurt the poor because it would not involve taxation. This way we make the rich work without making them poor and don't hurt the poor to tax the wealthy. Now we would of course have to modifications but i think it could help, Make some additions if you want.
 
128shot said:
and what says they can't amass so much wealth that it makes you so jealous you feel you need to steal it?


Nothing, absolutely nothing.

Then describe how they got their wealth. Hard work? Probably someone elses hard work.

And I don't want to steal it, I have wishes to spread it amongst everyone.
 
Either way, its stealing. how would you like it if i took what you have ?

you know how they got it? Initial risk, good oppotunity, and mangement skills.

Thats how, labor work isn't the only importance.
 
whats wrong with indifference?

its part of life.
 
indifference creates inequality which then leads to power struggle and as you can see people get oppresed when others want power.

if you want examples simply tell me.
 
Comrade Brian said:
To Jimmyjack:

Socialism and Communism are quite separate, despite whatever likenesses they have, Communism just is closer to Socialism than to capitalism.

Communism is evil, socialism is evil.
 
why are they good?

Capitalism is freedom. Socialism is Fascism in disguise.
 
why are they good?

Capitalism is freedom. Socialism is Fascism in disguise.

not necessarily, capitalism is not freedom, our freedom is constrained by the market forces. (assuming that every citizen's goal is to make the most success, money and power as possible). However there is still more freedom than pure socialism.
 
true freedom is a myth, period. something is always restricting.


I'm sure you knew that.....
 
nkgupta80 said:
not necessarily, capitalism is not freedom, our freedom is constrained by the market forces. (assuming that every citizen's goal is to make the most success, money and power as possible). However there is still more freedom than pure socialism.

Innovation is a product of freedom......capitalism creates the free environment for innovation to flourish.......socialism stifles innovation.......socialism drags everyone down to the lowest common denominator, whereas capitalism provides the environment for man to soar to ever higher achievement.

Think about it and just look around you to see that I am correct.

Capitalism needs constant oversight by congress, the press, and all citizens but it is by far the best economic system ever created by man.

There is one glaring fault that needs to be corrected immediately.......Laws must be created to protect the retirement/pension programs installed at all corporations. Pension plans should be off limits to bankruptcy proceedings and CEOs should be sent to jail if they rob the corp. pension plan when financial difficulties are encountered.
 
In response to hawk2:



A wise man once said
Call it what you will, incentives are what get people to work harder



He was named Nikita Krushchev.

whereas capitalism provides the environment for man to soar to ever higher achievement.
By stepping all over everyone else.
 
V.I. Lenin said:
In response to hawk2:



A wise man once said
Call it what you will, incentives are what get people to work harder



He was named Nikita Krushchev.


By stepping all over everyone else.

And Socialism says that I must stifle my desire to invent the next big step in technology so that I can altruistically provide food for some lazy scum who wants to lay at home all day make more babies for me to feed.

If your boy Nikita was so wise, why did communism crumble to dust? Seems that Nikita wasn't very good at creating those incentives that he knew so much about.

What you socialists deny is that Human Nature will never change. That is the most glaring flaw......Marx mistakenly theorized that human nature could be manipulated..........wrong.
 
And Socialism says that I must stifle my desire to invent the next big step in technology so that I can altruistically provide food for some lazy scum who wants to lay at home all day make more babies for me to feed.

Because everyone would do that if they had the chance. :doh


If your boy Nikita was so wise, why did communism crumble to dust? Seems that Nikita wasn't very good at creating those incentives that he knew so much about.
Nikita wasn't a dictator and was only around until he was replaced.


What you socialists deny is that Human Nature will never change. That is the most glaring flaw......Marx mistakenly theorized that human nature could be manipulated..........wrong.
Tell me EXACTLY what human nature is?

The point is I KNOW pure socialism will fail. But capitalism as it stands today is a beast that cannot be fed. I simply wish to change capitalism, not bring about an Ant-like society
 
V.I. Lenin said:
Because everyone would do that if they had the chance. :doh



Nikita wasn't a dictator and was only around until he was replaced.



Tell me EXACTLY what human nature is?

The point is I KNOW pure socialism will fail. But capitalism as it stands today is a beast that cannot be fed. I simply wish to change capitalism, not bring about an Ant-like society

Then why on earth would you pretend to support and defend an ideology that is bankrup and is doomed to fail?

Why do you perceive capitalism as a beast that must be fed? It is what people the world over want but cannot have because half the world is not free to choose.

If you want to know what human nature is: Read "The Blank Slate" by Steven Pinker.

When I first heard of Marx and his Utopian myth......I was about 12 years old and I knew what human nature was....... and I knew that Socialism would ultimately fail. The concept of " From each according to his abilities....to each according to his needs" is doomed to failure by human nature.
 
pure capitalism would fail just as pure socialism would fail...pure capitalism causes great social/economic gaps within a given population (which in turn can lead to immense instability), while pure socialism doesn't provide freedom and innovative incentives for the people.

I just wanted to point out something interesting. Marx actually predicted that with technology bridging the world (much like today's globalism)... capitalism would go beyond national borders. The world would eventually end up being a stark clash between the working masses and the elite. His next prediction was even more suggestive.. he believed that in a world without boundaries where there is only the elite and the working class... a communist revolution could occur. Imagine, as our world approaches this state of things, what governments would do to thwart another one of these revolutions. The resulting changes would be a huge step in the evolution of capitalism.
 
hawk2 said:
Then why on earth would you pretend to support and defend an ideology that is bankrup and is doomed to fail?

Why do you perceive capitalism as a beast that must be fed? It is what people the world over want but cannot have because half the world is not free to choose.

If you want to know what human nature is: Read "The Blank Slate" by Steven Pinker.

When I first heard of Marx and his Utopian myth......I was about 12 years old and I knew what human nature was....... and I knew that Socialism would ultimately fail. The concept of " From each according to his abilities....to each according to his needs" is doomed to failure by human nature.

I dont pretend to support anything. I support my own version of socialism.

From each according to his abilities is the theory of communism.

Lots of people in America can't choose. I guess you could call me a Euro-socialist. I want it so even the poorest can go to colleges and have health insurance. This isn't the case. I want it so there will be rich, but the gap will be lessened. Call it theft, I don't care. The rich shouldn't live in supreme luxury while the poor suffer. They can still live confortably even if they are taxed more.

I believe the government should give the poor, the POOR, not the lazy, a boost.
 
We should just get the state out of the economy almost completely.

I'm a big fan of common sense regulations. Why should someone have to tell me how high a door should be or how high a hand rail should be?

There is alot of BS regulation going around.
 
nkgupta80 said:
pure capitalism would fail just as pure socialism would fail...pure capitalism causes great social/economic gaps within a given population (which in turn can lead to immense instability), while pure socialism doesn't provide freedom and innovative incentives for the people.

I just wanted to point out something interesting. Marx actually predicted that with technology bridging the world (much like today's globalism)... capitalism would go beyond national borders. The world would eventually end up being a stark clash between the working masses and the elite. His next prediction was even more suggestive.. he believed that in a world without boundaries where there is only the elite and the working class... a communist revolution could occur. Imagine, as our world approaches this state of things, what governments would do to thwart another one of these revolutions. The resulting changes would be a huge step in the evolution of capitalism.

Apparently Marx did not forsee the creation of Labor Unions.......and the resultant redistribution of wealth that they brought about.

The stark disparity between the working class and the elite is no longer a huge chasm but merely a step to the next level brought about by the freedom to be innovative or to be able to obtain a better education that in itself creates more freedom through opportunity.

I don't know what you mean by "Pure" capitalism but I presume you mean the unconstrained capitalism of the late 19th, and early 20th centuries, when the robber barons like Carnegie,Vanderbilt, Mellon, and the others built monuments to themselves in the form of great mansions all over the world.......while the workers barely existed on pennies per day.

Those times are history, and there is almost enough oversight and law enforcement (Most of the laws required have already been enacted) to constrain Capitalism. There is still some work to be done but we are almost there.
 
Back
Top Bottom