MellowFarmer
Well-Known Member
I am curious about the amount of negative connotations using Socialism as if it were Red Communism; how would you define Socialism and how does it differ from Red Communism in your view?
my conception of socialism is far from yours. when i hear socialism, i think "means of production shared more strongly among the producers". i don't think of government having the means of production, which is more how i imagine communism. and i can see communistic systems working to some extent, just not the 'everyone wears a grey shirt' kind of communism that was practiced in the USSR.Pure socialism: stealing, theft, robbery.
So the collective steals from itself?Pure socialism: stealing, theft, robbery.
my conception of socialism is far from yours. when i hear socialism, i think "means of production shared more strongly among the producers". i don't think of government having the means of production, which is more how i imagine communism. and i can see communistic systems working to some extent, just not the 'everyone wears a grey shirt' kind of communism that was practiced in the USSR.
no one way of government is ever going to be best, the idea is to swallow some pills, not the whole bottle. doses of socialism mixed in with capitalism, which is about what we have now, seems rather desirable.
With pure capitalism you look like this guy.my conception of socialism is far from yours. when i hear socialism, i think "means of production shared more strongly among the producers". i don't think of government having the means of production, which is more how i imagine communism. and i can see communistic systems working to some extent, just not the 'everyone wears a grey shirt' kind of communism that was practiced in the USSR.
no one way of government is ever going to be best, the idea is to swallow some pills, not the whole bottle. doses of socialism mixed in with capitalism, which is about what we have now, seems rather desirable.
Yes, the self is stolen and doesn't exist.So the collective steals from itself?
Fine, then Capitalism = the rich stealing from the poorYes, the self is stolen and doesn't exist.
Not quite. Pure capitalism means everything's for sale. That's a poor way to liveFine, then Capitalism = the rich stealing from the poor
toucheNot quite. Pure capitalism means everything's for sale. That's a poor way to live
that's unrealistic and exactly why you would need some form of capitalism or other ism to make it realistic.A Closer Look: Definition of Socialism
Many people don’t understand the true meaning of socialism. Some assume that it applies to both economic and political systems. However, according to the definition of socialism, the true doctrine is only concerned with economic systems.
Socialism is a system whereby the ownership of capital, resources and production capability reside with and are controlled by the citizens. In theory, citizens have equal access to the products and resources and are compensated based on the amount of work performed.This form of economic control claims to have the benefit of allocating resources, services and compensation equitably among the population. In other words, the system purports to be fair to everyone and to provide everyone with an equal piece-of-the-pie.
http://reference.yourdictionary.com/word-definitions/definition-of-socialism.html
you want everyone to type in the same drab font/size/color as everyone else. that is the limitation of personal expression and freedom that lead to the revolt against USSR style communism.I do however agree with the socialist notion of removing Wordz's size command privileges.
This is FDR's proposed 2nd Bill of Rights minus the right to employmentin other words, everyone is entitled to basic dignities as a condition of being born a human: food, clothing, shelter, and going further, even health care, education and a path to upward mobility if so desired. whether you want to attain more and how much more is entirely up to the individual, and at that point requires a capitalistic model to succeed.
gainful employment, or the ability to provide more than just sustenance for oneself is covered by 'path to upward mobility' in my narrow definition. there are plenty of people out there that are willing to take free labor from an aspiring [x] in return for OTJ experience and a path forward to becoming a future [x].This is FDR's proposed 2nd Bill of Rights minus the right to employment
You caught megainful employment, or the ability to provide more than just sustenance for oneself is covered by 'path to upward mobility' in my narrow definition. there are plenty of people out there that are willing to take free labor from an aspiring [x] in return for OTJ experience and a path forward to becoming a future [x].
the question of this thread asked how I defined socialism, not what the merriam-webster definition is, or the yourdictionary.com definition is.
good thread, am looking forward to what other people think "socialism" is.You caught me