Originally posted by: oojason
1. Since socialst nations have existed in the past and failed, what do you attribute their failure to? Is it reasonable to believe that these "obstacles" can be overcome in the short term?
Please do...
JediSage - what is your definition of socialism? and how does it differ from Communism?
1. Since socialst nations have existed in the past and failed, what do you attribute their failure to? Is it reasonable to believe that these "obstacles" can be overcome in the short term?
some have failed - some have succeeded. The UK is governed by a socialist based party, as are other countires around the world. It is intersting to note that some countries that have enforced a system upon it's inhabitants have rebelled against it.
The UK is currently quasi-socialist, however I think it's safe to say Labor is on the way out. That being said, the people of Cuba don't have that choice. It's socialism to the end. Also, whatever happens in the UK in the short-term is a moot point due to it's membership in the EU, which is totally socialist.
That really isn't about socialism, but is you wish I'll come back to it later.
The UK is currently quasi-socialist, however I think it's safe to say Labor is on the way out. That being said, the people of Cuba don't have that choice. It's socialism to the end. Also, whatever happens in the UK in the short-term is a moot point due to it's membership in the EU, which is totally socialist.
2. Were any of these nations imperialistic in nature, meaning did they expand beyond their national borders and conquer territory not in their possession prior to the Bolshevic revolution of the early part of the 20th century?
Please do...
18. What is the difference between Marxist-Leninism vs Communism and can the more "pure" forms be implemented without innevitably deteriorating to totalitarianism?
Have a look at the British Commonwealth and just how many countries are part of it - could add the USA to it on past criteria.
This is somewhat irrelevant to my question. I'm not denying that other countries/systems are/were imperialistic, I'm just trying to discern whether or not socialism as it has been implemented is also imperialistic.
That really isn't about socialism, but is you wish I'll come back to it later.
This is somewhat irrelevant to my question. I'm not denying that other countries/systems are/were imperialistic, I'm just trying to discern whether or not socialism as it has been implemented is also imperialistic.
3. Were there "exceptions" to the socialist philosophies of these countries, meaning did any of the ruling class own nice automobiles or houses that were well beyond "....his needs"?
See above
17. What is the difference between Facism and Communism? Do they not both lead to state control of the economy, thus making ideologies irrelevant?
Probably so - the idea of socialism is to work together and help those around you to better everyon'e lives. It does not mean people should not have 'nice things'.
I think that's an over-simplification. The central tenent of socialism is "each according to his needs", not the president can drive a limo while everyone else has a bicycle. If it's to be implemented it should be implemented evenly for everyone regardless of station.
Again, that is not a socilaist death toll - it a commnist based one and enforced on the people.
I think that's an over-simplification. The central tenent of socialism is "each according to his needs", not the president can drive a limo while everyone else has a bicycle. If it's to be implemented it should be implemented evenly for everyone regardless of station.
Is brute labor the only force that is essential to the prosperity and equality of a society?
What is the difference?
16. Given that the socialist death toll is at 100 million and counting, vastly outpacing "facist" numbers, does socialism get a free pass because it's more "altruistic"...at least on the surface? Can any ideology that results in the death of even one life be considered to be altruisitic?
No, of course not. People voluntarily working together to acheive a goal can accomplish a lot.
But that's not what socialism is. You're talking about a co-operative society where people do this without coersion. In a socialist society, if I have a farm that produces food at the expense of my labor, that food can and most likely will be taken from me and distributed to someone else. Who does this? The state. Not me.
I disagree - Communism has been implemented in some of those countries you mentioned - not socialism.
But that's not what socialism is. You're talking about a co-operative society where people do this without coersion. In a socialist society, if I have a farm that produces food at the expense of my labor, that food can and most likely will be taken from me and distributed to someone else. Who does this? The state. Not me.
6. If wealth were to be "redistributed" from the "20%" of the world's population that control it, and then given to the other 80%, will despotic rulers and tyrants be disposed to give this wealth to their people, or keep it for themselves?
Correct. The IRS is the enforcement arm of a quasi-socialist (for now) system.
15. Of the examples the world has known so far, socialism as implemented in Cuba, China, North Korea, Soviet Union, etc; and capitalism as seen in the US, UK, Australia, etc: Which has offered the greater personal liberties to it's citizens?
Are the 80% all despotic leaders and tyrants? - what of 20% leaders? Do you give the leaders the money and say 'here it is' and leave them to it, or do you agree schemes and projects that help the most needy and take an active role in how it' is allocated.
"Schemes and projects" are a sure way to have a repeat of Oil for Food scandals (hard to believe given how noble the UN is and all). The starvations in Ethiopia and Somalia were addressed with massive amounts of food and such from many countries, but it never got to it's people because of the governments of these countries.
Ask the IRS, or the taman, or the parking wardens.
"Schemes and projects" are a sure way to have a repeat of Oil for Food scandals (hard to believe given how noble the UN is and all). The starvations in Ethiopia and Somalia were addressed with massive amounts of food and such from many countries, but it never got to it's people because of the governments of these countries.
7. If they did give the money to their citizens, would the social and physical infrastructure of these other nations immediately improve? If so, how?
This is coersion.
12. Is force justifiable in the redistribution of wealth?
Immediately? Possibly not - such an underastking takes time. If a hosptial can buy several £million of new equipment for it's patients it will still need to train technicians and and staff on how to use them etc
Again assuming it even gets past the governments in the first place. I think it's fair to say that many governments have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo in their socio-politcal constructs, if not outright oppressing opposition and people in their societies
They are free to live wherever they feel as long as they abide by the people's wishes. They do not have to stay where they do not agree with how things are being run.
Again assuming it even gets past the governments in the first place. I think it's fair to say that many governments have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo in their socio-politcal constructs, if not outright oppressing opposition and people in their societies
9. For socialism to be truly implemented, the government must assume vast powers. Once assumed, what guarantee is there that the government will not abuse these powers?
But can politicians be divorced from the political process? Can there be government without politicians?
11. What if 1 or 2 people in said country decided they didn't feel socialism was right for them. Would the government be justified in using any and all means to implement the system for the greater good?
Vote them in, vote them out - they don't need to be all powerful - tghe electorate (the people) still have ultimate power.
Do they have this power in North Korea, Cuba, or China?
As a whole? I don't know. It seems politicians cancertainly lose sight of issues for personal gain.
Do they have this power in North Korea, Cuba, or China?
10. Do people try to accumulate more or less power?
As a whole? I don't know. It seems politicians cancertainly lose sight of issues for personal gain.
But can politicians be divorced from the political process? Can there be government without politicians?
11. What if 1 or 2 people in said country decided they didn't feel socialism was right for them. Would the government be justified in using any and all means to implement the system for the greater good?
They are free to live wherever they feel as long as they abide by the people's wishes. They do not have to stay where they do not agree with how things are being run.
This is coersion.
12. Is force justifiable in the redistribution of wealth?
Ask the IRS, or the taman, or the parking wardens.
Correct. The IRS is the enforcement arm of a quasi-socialist (for now) system.
15. Of the examples the world has known so far, socialism as implemented in Cuba, China, North Korea, Soviet Union, etc; and capitalism as seen in the US, UK, Australia, etc: Which has offered the greater personal liberties to it's citizens?
I disagree - Communism has been implemented in some of those countries you mentioned - not socialism.
What is the difference?
16. Given that the socialist death toll is at 100 million and counting, vastly outpacing "facist" numbers, does socialism get a free pass because it's more "altruistic"...at least on the surface? Can any ideology that results in the death of even one life be considered to be altruisitic?
Again, that is not a socilaist death toll - it a commnist based one and enforced on the people.
See above
17. What is the difference between Facism and Communism? Do they not both lead to state control of the economy, thus making ideologies irrelevant?
That really isn't about socialism, but is you wish I'll come back to it later.
Please do...
18. What is the difference between Marxist-Leninism vs Communism and can the more "pure" forms be implemented without innevitably deteriorating to totalitarianism?
That really isn't about socialism, but is you wish I'll come back to it later.
Please do...
JediSage - what is your definition of socialism? and how does it differ from Communism?
socialism = an economic system in which the existing system is abandoned in favor of a system of "...to each according to his needs". In this situation the government must assume near totalitarian powers to administer the economy and ensure that nobody is cheating the system. The government must also take steps to make sure that the system is perpetuated as it would be too difficult to continually switch back and forth between socialism and a market economy. As with pregnancy, there's no such thing as being 1/2 way. Either you are totally or are on your way to being totally socialist.
Difference between socialism and communism: I asked you first
