babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Real Socialism--Why it has not and will never work

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Real Socialism--Why it has not and will never work
LiMpY
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1834

posted 12 December 2001 02:12 PM      Profile for LiMpY     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Socialism has not worked so far, without fostering an oppressive and dangerous regime, with little respect for civil rights (Cuba, China, the former USSR and Soviet Bloc countries) nor will it ever work.

Regardless of modern, western-imposed ideas, socialism would never work because there will always be laziness in society. No matter what you do, there will always be someone willing to live off someone else's back.

What do you do with someone whose feelings are selfish? Well, that's where the militant regimes come into play. You simply bust into their home and make them disappear, to the benefit of the rest of the population. But this leads to appointed leaders making arbitrary decisions without due process. And the public is happy with it until someone they know disappears.

So all of you who believe that socialism would work if not for the evil USA, corporations, McCarthyism, weapons, etc. etc., need to wake up. Some degree of capitalism is necessary in society, just as some degree of socialism is necessary in humanity. But neither can be achieved in fullness, nor can either be erased in totality.

Peace and Love, JCOP


From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
bandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1435

posted 12 December 2001 02:49 PM      Profile for bandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It isn't the death, Imprisonment, or driving underground of those who had any chance of inciting a mass movement like say Malcom X , Martin luther king, Huey P. Newton,Abbie Hoffman, Joe hill, Antonio Gramsci, etc. etc.
The CIA followed around Trudeau for fuck sakes.

From: sudbury | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Apemantus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1845

posted 12 December 2001 03:30 PM      Profile for Apemantus        Edit/Delete Post
Gosh, what an insight!

Of course pure anything is never gonna be achieved, but the point is whilst we have such a travesty of pure capitalism, whilst the system is such a bastardised version of the capitalist theory, it is essential that people advocate socialism and its principles, not because capitalism doesn't work but because the protectionism, the unequal start to capitalism, the inbuilt biases of power structures, the inherent incapability of our systems to actually work how they should under a pure capitalist system all lead to the disgusting state of the world today.

Just as Russia was a perverted and twisted form of socialism, so too America is a perverted and twisted version of true capitalism. Thus both influences are needed to tame the worst excesses of the other. That is not an argument against socialism, it is an argument against humans and their inability to put a(ny) theory into practice.


From: Brighton, UK | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
QuikSilver
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1470

posted 12 December 2001 04:44 PM      Profile for QuikSilver     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Castro's Cuba is nowhere near socialist.

60 Minutes did a documentary about a week ago about exiles in Miami and South Florida sending millions of American dollars back to relatives in Cuba. Castro imports fridges, cars, bulding materials etc... and sells them to these relatives that have the greenbacks.
Of course instead of the profit going to a corporation, workers and small business owners, the proceeds go directly into Castro's bank account. The Hispanic Floridians don't care that they're propping up his phony socialist regime, they're just trying to help their families. Who can blame them?
What's created is a class, with most of the amenities of modern Western society, and those living in Castro's classless society. (read: dirt poor)

[ December 12, 2001: Message edited by: QuikSilver ]


From: Your Wildest Fantasies | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 12 December 2001 05:32 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow, LiMpY- deep. really made me think.

Even Quicksilver knows more about "socialist vs. mock socialist"!

Of course there will always be lazy people! There are ways of dealing with that without instituting dictatorships, and every socialist on here- as well as most everyone else on here- knows that!

And there actually have been, and are democratic socialist governments. You need only look to Namibia and South Africa. Sure- life isn't pretty there- but that has more to do with prior arrangements (eg. Colonialism and exploitation) than modern governments.

The main reason you don't see so many socialist governments on this side of the ocean is that we lack a diverse media, and thanks to foreign influence around the Americas, "socialism" has become a dirty word- regardless of the ideas behind it.


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 12 December 2001 05:36 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Of course there will always be lazy people! There are ways of dealing with that without instituting dictatorships, and every socialist on here- as well as most everyone else on here- knows that!

And they are?


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
QuikSilver
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1470

posted 12 December 2001 05:45 PM      Profile for QuikSilver     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Even QuikSilver knows more about "socialist vs. "mock socialist"!

Ya I love you to0 Meades~! My point was any kind of socialism is unworkable. There will always be people that want to innovate, prosper and get ahead.
I may even side with you that the American Corporate culture/political system needs to be reigned in, which is really legalized bribery. 25 or 30 huge corporations getting favorable legislation and tax breaks due to campaign contributions is disturbing.

However, government can't even provide efficient garbage service or road maintenance.
Do I really think they can solve complex social issues ((give us all jobs, eliminate poverty, give us all free health care..etc))and economic inequalities? Not a chance.

[ December 12, 2001: Message edited by: QuikSilver ]


From: Your Wildest Fantasies | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 12 December 2001 05:54 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
there will always be laziness in society. No matter what you do, there will always be someone willing to live off someone else's back.

What do you do with someone whose feelings are selfish?


Hey, I thought this was going to be a thread about socialism. Can't we leave the capitalists behind for a change and look at the working people?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pankaj
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1040

posted 12 December 2001 05:55 PM      Profile for Pankaj   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ooh, that's sooo good.
From: London, ON | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 12 December 2001 07:32 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
there will always be laziness in society. No matter what you do, there will always be someone willing to live off someone else's back.
What do you do with someone whose feelings are selfish?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tried addressing this chesnut in a previous thread. It would be pure laziness on my part not to address it again.

I'm not a big believer in the term laziness. I certainly don't believe it to be an innate trait. In fact it's more of a moral judgement rather than anything else.

To say someone is unwilling to work or exert effort doesn't really explain a great deal either. Immediately when I consider the term, I wonder lazy under what conditions, what circumstances. If someone is considered lazy because they are unwilling to expend a great deal of energy with little result; then I would suggest most of us are lazy.

It is one of the great Capitalist myths that there is a direct connection between energy expended and economic outcome. The simple eqaution: poor=lazy, rich=productive. The reality is that innumerable people expend great deals of energy with little reward where there are others who reep rewards with relatively minimal effort. George W. Bush is a fine example of this.

It's very difficult for someone to be productive without opportunity and capitalism is very effective in denying opportunity to a segment of the population; predominantly because Capitalism doesn't function at it's best without a reserve army of unemployed that also maintains the average wage-slave in a state of constant fear. I don't believe this to be a productive use of human capital.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 12 December 2001 11:18 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Britain: nuked by the capitalists.
Canada: dismantled by the capitalists.
Sweden?

From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 12 December 2001 11:40 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Started sex changes?
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Apemantus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1845

posted 13 December 2001 04:37 AM      Profile for Apemantus        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
However, government can't even provide efficient garbage service or road maintenance.
Do I really think they can solve complex social issues ((give us all jobs, eliminate poverty, give us all free health care..etc))and economic inequalities? Not a chance.


And private business can? Ha, what a load of rubbish. Its least worst scenarios and for many things, the market (through imperfect information, monopolies, externalities and other stuff I cannot be bothered to write about right now) fails dismally. The government can also fail, so we have to look at the specific area and make a decision which is best.

For road maintenance and garbage collection, no reason why the market shouldn't work, but for health, education, the reduction of poverty and many others, the market doesn't work and the public sector does a better job.

Try getting the private market to do you national defence...


From: Brighton, UK | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Aloha
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1955

posted 13 December 2001 06:03 AM      Profile for Aloha     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lazy??? Has the author ever considered how the well-off and the wealthy spend their time? Well they shop. They and their surrogates are constantly looking for bargains in politicians, lawyers, investment counselers, Hermes and Donna Karan and psychotherapy.
Maybe we should just dump some money on the lazy folks the author is thinking of (i.e. the poor) and make them as productive as the disadvantaged wealthy.

From: Ontario | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
LiMpY
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1834

posted 13 December 2001 02:37 PM      Profile for LiMpY     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
NRK, I changed the thread because this is purely my opinion, and I didn't want it confused with the UPC, for whom I must speak for the time being.

As for laziness, you reiterated that you believe people don't want to work because of certain circumstances.

So, what do you propose to do with people who want to do the least amount of work possible? While many left-minded individuals the world over will give, and give, and give in order to achieve what they believe is right (hunger strikes, charity, volunteerism, etc.); there will remain those who are more right-minded (i.e. lie, steal, cheat, make money so they can drive others into poverty). So what do you propose one should do with these people?

Based on your previous comments, I get the idea that you would simply like to give them a place to stay, give them food, give them education--and while you would expect them to reciprocate, hey you gave them everything they need, so why should they do shit for you?

Sorry NRK, there will always be people out there who want to screw you so they can get ahead, and if society tries to rehabilitate every one of them, it will be detrimental to the majority of those who do work.

Socialism= idealism
Not everyone can be helped.

Peace and Love, JCOP


btw...I still believe in the leftist cause, despite this rant. I just think we need to be less radical in our demands.
And I do not believe in the capitalist notion that hard work= rich people, laziness= poor people. Just look at all the Lefties out there who work their asses off, consumed with the cause, and get nothing out of it...*yawn*


From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
QuikSilver
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1470

posted 13 December 2001 09:10 PM      Profile for QuikSilver     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Assuming all supporters of capitalism are yacht owning, golf playing, cigar smoking, predatory corporate fat cats is intillectually dishonest and flat-out ignorant.

It's akin to labelling everyone on the left as a hippy, immature, dope-smoking, vandalizing, anarchist. Imagine the stink if anyone used that stereotype on these hallowed boards!

The vast majority of capitalists I know are small-business owners and entrepreneurs who do "evils" such as work 70-80 hrs/week to provide for their families and generate capital for social programs. Oh ... and pay for gov't employees back-breaking 38hr work weeks (with every other Friday off) , plus pensions , plus their overtime.

After tax 75-85% of their income goes to pay for the entitlements that warms the cockles of many a socialist heart. (income taxes, property taxes, GST, PST, excise taxes, fuel taxes, miscellaneous business taxes and the litany of other gov't and licensing fees)
Without a thriving business sector, there is nothing , we are the USSR pre-glasnost, nuff said.

From these "corporate bastards" point of view ,what they get for their hard earned dollars, are... a)inneficiency; (see the $7 billion Dept. of Indian Affairs plus contless billions in social spending, for example. And aboriginals, tragically, STILL languish in poverty, alcoholism and dissolutionment)
...b)waste (see: Dept. of Heritage, the CRTC for example).... c)political patronage (see the current federal Liberals for an impressive case study of using public funds to help your pals)

But everything would work better if you ass***** worked a little harder, longer and gave our gov't more money to throw around? More taxes, more government control, more spending, more waste, more beurocracy will solve our socio-economic ills? Ummmmm.........no

So, yea... whine and gripe all you want but don't expect us to pave the road to your socialist utopia.

[ December 13, 2001: Message edited by: QuikSilver ]


From: Your Wildest Fantasies | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 13 December 2001 09:56 PM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I was going to mention last night that the military only lives by socialism. 100% tax funded, the biggest global social program of all time, and the direct spin offs to private corporations don't even raise an eyebrow from the most ardent right wing capitalists. Hmm.
Apparently socialism is only good for corporations but not for people. Privatize the military perhaps they will learn to be more efficient and get off the government tit.

From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chickenbum
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1917

posted 13 December 2001 10:49 PM      Profile for Chickenbum     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Right or left, the military is an essential government domain. The argument is over the necessity of the welfare state and the degree to which free market controls are implemented and controlled.

I'm with QuikSilver.


From: happily functioning in society | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
QuikSilver
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1470

posted 13 December 2001 10:56 PM      Profile for QuikSilver     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Someone on here agrees with me.

*faints*


From: Your Wildest Fantasies | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 13 December 2001 11:13 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm sure there are plenty who agree with you you're not the only right winger who has tumbled into the twilight zone.
From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 13 December 2001 11:21 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So, what do you propose to do with people who want to do the least amount of work possible?

Who the hell wants to do something one doesn't want to do?

I actually think it's a little stupid that our society seems to think a hallmark of virtue is doing the equivalent of jumping in a pile of horse manure for 8 hours a day and going "mm-mm, good!"


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 14 December 2001 12:24 AM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My argument is that the military is a welfare state. If that model is to be used for the basics of maintainiing the state. QS and Chikenbum (nice name) agree that the military is a necessity. Okay lets go with this. I agree it is a necessity. I'm sure you two would agree that it is underfunded as well.
Health care, water treatment, roads and infrastructure are also a necessity. If the military model serves as a model of efficiency and is necessary for human survival then it would follow that you agree that you also believe in tax funded social services. That means workers working for the betterment of the state. Just like the military. That is unless the military only exists to serve itself just like any corporation that survives by billing people for the necessities of life.

[ December 14, 2001: Message edited by: Pimji ]


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Apemantus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1845

posted 14 December 2001 06:55 AM      Profile for Apemantus        Edit/Delete Post
The arguments for government intervention in the welfare state are to do with where the market fails.

Numerous books have been written about it by people like Howard Glennester and David Piachaud and Julian Le Grand and though there are good arguments for competition bringing efficiency etc., there are also strong arguments that the market does not deliver as good as the government. There are problems on both sides, and to dismiss either is short sighted.


From: Brighton, UK | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
LiMpY
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1834

posted 14 December 2001 12:01 PM      Profile for LiMpY     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The vast majority of capitalists I know are small-business owners and entrepreneurs who do "evils" such as work 70-80 hrs/week to provide for their families and generate capital for social programs.

Given that these people supply such a large amount of the funds needed for social programs, I would call these people socialists. After all, many business owners would be better off in the US, with less tax burden. So the fact that they stay in Canada goes to say that they support Canada's responsibility with regards to social programs.

Alternatively, they may not support this, instead wishing for tax cuts. If this is indeed the case, then they are capitalists intent on bettering themselves at the expense of others (i.e. those who benefit from said social programs).

Government waste is a different subject altogether, so I will only address it in brief: "The Liberals are the worst money-managers in history". Nuff said

Peace and Love, JCOP


From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca