What is socialism?

[MadMike]

It's fair if you choose to become a doctor knowing that you will only ever get same wages as everyone else. You would do it because you want to be a doctor rather than for the money.

No it's not. That's just your idea on fairness.

Opinion on fairness is not only subjective but subject to change as well. It's easy to think it's fair before you start studying to be a doctor to only come to a realisation of how unfair it is once you go through it.

 

[hobbers]

A lot of people who become doctors would not become doctors if it wasn't for the extra money and the prestige it has over other jobs, that's just reality.

 

[MadMike]

As I mentioned before, it’s how much you value individualism vs collectivism.

It's more about forcing collectivism on a human race that has a highly individualistic streak. That collectivism never seems to apply very well to the people at the helm either.

Socialism tends to clash with the reality of human nature very harshly.

 

[Sweet Square]

Socialism = podcasts and posting.

End thread.

 

[balaks]

No it's not. That's just your idea on fairness.

Opinion on fairness is not only subjective but subject to change as well. It's easy to think it's fair before you start studying to be a doctor to only come to a realisation of how unfair it is once you go through it.

Perhaps it is, however I think it's extremely difficult for us to really get how it is to grow up in an anti-capitalist culture where our own financial aspirations essentially would cease to exist. How would you feel about it if you fully embraced communism? You might be happy to do the training knowing you will save lives and gain social status rather than financial gain. Social status may be the one thing that differentiates you from your peers in an environment where everyone earns the same cash, so in that way this could be the incentive to do it.

I'm just pontificating really because it's really hard to know what it's like coming from a capitalist culture, it's entirely alien to us really.

 

[balaks]

A lot of people who become doctors would not become doctors if it wasn't for the extra money and the prestige it has over other jobs, that's just reality.

Yes in our culture that's true. How then can you explain Cuba having some of the best trained doctors in the world with the best healthcare system in that part of the world (arguably including America). The answer is because they want to do it and it's not for the money.

 

[MadMike]

Yes in our culture that's true. How then can you explain Cuba having some of the best trained doctors in the world with the best healthcare system in that part of the world (arguably including America). The answer is because they want to do it and it's not for the money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_medical_internationalism

It's a national policy which is used for national income generation and as for the doctors themselves it gives them a chance to leave Cuba.

You're also overestimating the amount of freedom people had over their career choices in Socialist countries. If the Maoist state said you're becoming a doctor, you're becoming a doctor. No ifs, no buts, no coconuts.

 

[Carolina Red]

@Florida Man

From what I’ve been taught...




You’d also have your Authoritarian Statist ideologies in the top left and Libertarian capitalist ideologies in the bottom right.

Edit:
*Disclaimer: it was kinda hard to fit the dots on the grid along with the wording without spacing them out a bit more than they might need to be to keep it readable.*

 

[Synco]

A lot of people who become doctors would not become doctors if it wasn't for the extra money and the prestige it has over other jobs, that's just reality.

Which, from my experience with doctors, must not necessarily be a bad thing...

 

[spontaneus1]

A lot of people who become doctors would not become doctors if it wasn't for the extra money and the prestige it has over other jobs, that's just reality.

A job like being a doctor will still have the extra prestige even without the money.

 

[MadMike]

@Florida Man

From what I’ve been taught...




You’d also have your Authoritarian Statist ideologies in the top left and Libertarian capitalist ideologies in the bottom right.

How does liberalism rank so high in authoritarianism? Kind of counter intuitive.

 

[Carolina Red]

How does liberalism rank so high in authoritarianism? Kind of counter intuitive.

I’m fine with moving it. Where do you think it should be? It was kind of an amalgamation of the general locations of the Canadian, American, British, German, and Australian liberal parties positions on the Political Compass charts that they make.

If you’re thinking of Classical Liberalism, then that would fall into the bottom right, as it is more of a combination of social libertarian and economically lassez-faire policies.

Disclaimer: it was kinda hard to fit the dots on with the wording without spacing them out a bit more than they might need to be so it didn’t run into one another and become unreadable.

 

[balaks]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_medical_internationalism

It's a national policy which is used for national income generation and as for the doctors themselves it gives them a chance to leave Cuba.

You're also overestimating the amount of freedom people had over their career choices in Socialist countries. If the Maoist state said you're becoming a doctor, you're becoming a doctor. No ifs, no buts, no coconuts.

That may be true but clearly not everyone can become a doctor, so the very fact you were selected to be one suggests prestige in some way. You are right about some folk using it as a way out of Cuba, as I said communism does restrict personal freedom and many people would want out because of that.

Interestingly the last time I was in Cuba things had changed dramatically. People could now own property, start a business and many people doing jobs such as doctors has given it up to work in tourist facing jobs such as waiters, tour guides, etc because tourists tip and you can earn vastly more cash from that than working in anything else. So capitalism is creeping in and changing everything.

 

[Kasper]

Haha I just knew @Raoul was a neorealism fan, his predictions on Trump turned almost as bad out as Mearsheimer's prediction on Europe's future after the end of the Cold War.

 

[MadMike]

I’m fine with moving it. Where do you think it should be? It was kind of an amalgamation of the general locations of the Canadian, American, British, German, and Australian liberal parties positions on the Political Compass charts that they make.

Disclaimer: it was kinda hard to fit the dots on with the wording without spacing them out a bit more than they might need to be so it didn’t run into one another and become unreadable.

I mean this stuff is all subjective to an extent, but for me liberalism was always slighly right of centre while also being clearly way south of centre in the authoritarian-to-libertarian axis. More south than liberal socialism for sure. I mean this is what liberalism is:

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed, and equality before the law.Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support limited government, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), capitalism (free markets), democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion.

What part of this says authoritarian?

I would personally have 3rd way slightly left of centre too. But that's just me.

 

[Carolina Red]

I mean this stuff is all subjective to an extent, but for me liberalism was always right of centre while also being clearly way south of centre in the authoritarian-to-libertarian axis. More south than liberal socialism for sure. I mean this is what liberalism is:


What part of this says authoritarian?

I would personally have 3rd way slightly left of centre too. But that's just me.

I put 3rd way right of center because I’ve always understood it to be more capitalistic than social democracy.

I think if we are talking Classic Liberalism, then I absolutely agree that it should be in the bottom right.

Modern liberalism though has the added aspect of using the government to bring about desired social reform, which I believe is why you see so many modern liberal parties charted top right and why I placed it there myself.

 

[Raoul]

Haha I just knew @Raoul was a neorealism fan, his predictions on Trump turned almost as bad out as Mearsheimer's prediction on Europe's future after the end of the Cold War.

I'm actually more of a constructivist fan.

 

[MadMike]

I put 3rd way right of center because it is more capitalistic than social democracy.

There can be space between social democracy and the centre for the 3rd way to fit in.
That's where I'd put it anyway.

I think if we are talking Classic Liberalism, then I absolutely agree that it should be in the bottom right.

Modern liberalism though has the added aspect of using the government to bring about desired social reform, which I believe is why you see so many modern liberal parties charted top right and why I placed it there myself.

And? What's the connection between social reform and authoritarianism? The reform liberals try to bring about is all about freedom and equal rights. Only someone a little crazy would find something authoritarian in social reform allowing gay people to marry or people to change sex. It's quite the opposite

And if social reform was de facto authoritarian, irrespective of the type of reform, then resisting social reform (i.e. conservatism) would be de facto libertarian and thus placed in the bottom right.

Does not compute, chief.

EDIT: And the triggering part for me is that it's part of right wing propaganda. That liberals try to "force" stuff on conservatives. Like stopping discrimination against others is really forceful on the poor conservatives. They can't burn people on crosses any more. What happened to the good old days? Sad emoji.

 

[Carolina Red]

What's the connection between social reform and authoritarianism?

The use of government power to bring it about.

“Authoritarian” in the sense that the government is telling people what they can and cannot do. As you go up the Y axis you go up in levels of assertion of authority.

 

[NoLogo]

@Florida Man

From what I’ve been taught...




You’d also have your Authoritarian Statist ideologies in the top left and Libertarian capitalist ideologies in the bottom right.

Edit:
*Disclaimer: it was kinda hard to fit the dots on the grid along with the wording without spacing them out a bit more than they might need to be to keep it readable.*

Honestly that seems very wrong. Liberals being that high on Authoritarian? I agree they usually lean more on the right, being eh social Darwinist kind of guys but ordering them high on the Authoritarian scale just seems wrong.

Same goes for Democratic Socialists, they are heavily in favor of state intervention, pretty much the closest you can get to a communist without being one, so they are certainly not Libertarian at all.

Honestly, where did you get this graph from?

 

[MadMike]

The use of government power to bring it about.

“Authoritarian” in the sense that the government is telling people what they can and cannot do. As you go up the Y axis you go up in levels of assertion of authority.

Any government does that (telling people what they can’t/can do), it’s pretty much the function of a government to pass laws. That’s not authoritarianism.

Authoritarian is the enforcement or advocacy of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.

But since your personal freedom stops where the personal freedom of the next person begins, liberalism is actually increasing rather than restricting personal freedom.

EDIT: I have a feeling we won’t come even close to agreeing on this one.

 

[Carolina Red]

Any government does that (telling people what they can’t/can do), it’s pretty much the function of a government to pass laws. That’s not authoritarianism.

Again, the Y coordinate is a scale.

But since your personal freedom stops where the personal freedom of the next person begins, liberalism is actually increasing rather than restricting personal freedom.

Modern liberalism has an authoritarian social policy aspect to it. Classical liberalism does not.

 

[Carolina Red]

Liberals being that high on Authoritarian? I agree they usually lean more on the right, being eh social Darwinist kind of guys but ordering them high on the Authoritarian scale just seems wrong.

“High on the scale”...

Read the disclaimer. They’re all in more simplified, general positions for the sake of readability. If I made it flatter, it would run into each other.

I would assert though that modern liberalism belongs above the X axis.

 

[Green_Red]

Socialisms what you do when you go to the pub drinking. Communism is unisex toilets.

 

[Man of Leisure]

I visited Cuba in the Castro era. Everybody was given a home and a job and payed exactly the same wage. Doctors, taxi drivers, dish washers,etc all on same money. They also have the best healthcare in the Americas and it's free for all its people. I can see the appeal in a way, really communism is the opposite of capitalism.

Cuba is a country still stuck in the 50s where people are living on $30 per month. Really should not be looked at as a model for success. Why would you want doctors and dish washers to be paid the same wage?

 

[DoomSlayer]

Cuba is a country still stuck in the 50s where people are living on $30 per month. Really should not be looked at as a model for success. Why would you want doctors and dish washers to be paid the same wage?

I'm a bit baffled at some people's opinions. I bet nobody here has lived or has had relatives live in a communism state. That ideology has never and never will turn out as the supposed ideal says it should.

 

[Florida Man]

Cuba is a country still stuck in the 50s where people are living on $30 per month. Really should not be looked at as a model for success. Why would you want doctors and dish washers to be paid the same wage?

There are a lot of factors for Cuba’s current state as it is and it’s not all down to ideology. The US has a LOT to do with them being poor with the foreign policies. And that could really be applied to a lot of countries that tried their hand at socialism.

 

[Florida Man]

I'm a bit baffled at some people's opinions. I bet nobody here has lived or has had relatives live in a communism state. That ideology has never and never will turn out as the supposed ideal says it should.

I’ve personally known people who have lived under communism and look onto it fondly.

 

[HarlanEiffler]

I'll help you http://blog.peerform.com/top-ten-most-socialist-countries-in-the-world/

You're welcome

I mean... that's me corrected... Come on now, you can't be serious...
The Swedish party in government is literally called social democratic party of Sweden, same with Denmark.
Ireland is a socialist country? Wonder how the Irish see that.
Socialism is inherently revolutionary, with the goal of overthrowing capitalism. Social democracy does not have that goal, but instead looks to reform capitalism in order to tame capitalism and counter certain negative aspects of it (unemployment, poverty, the risk of not having health care, guaranteeing free education etc). No social democrat seeks to change the system, the status quo of property or the status quo regarding means of production.

Here you go: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

 

[DoomSlayer]

I’ve personally known people who have lived under communism and look onto it fondly.

I'm personally from a country that was 45 years under a totalitarian communist regime under the umbrella of the Soviet Union. Trust me when I say it's definitely nothing like the utopian views many have.

I would not dispute that every system has its' positives, but to believe that this one in particular holds some moral high ground over democracy or capitalism is crazy, in my opinion. The fact is it did start as some pseudo-moralistic view on equality but with time it transformed in many different ways and had nothing to do with people's well being.

It's a very long topic though, my family has a history of being part of both sides of the coin and the constant ideological struggle is very hard to take for me personally. I absolutely have no problem with you having a favourable opinion on communism and that's the beauty of democracy - we should be able to discuss topics without resorting to creating personal qualms against each other. Unfortunately, the concept of "agree to disagree" does not work in a totalitarian system.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Socialism = podcasts and posting.

End thread.

Bedroom Bolsheviks.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

I'm personally from a country that was 45 years under a totalitarian communist regime under the umbrella of the Soviet Union. Trust me when I say it's definitely nothing like the utopian views many have.

I would not dispute that every system has its' positives, but to believe that this one in particular holds some moral high ground over democracy or capitalism is crazy, in my opinion. The fact is it did start as some pseudo-moralistic view on equality but with time it transformed in many different ways and had nothing to do with people's well being.

It's a very long topic though, my family has a history of being part of both sides of the coin and the constant ideological struggle is very hard to take for me personally. I absolutely have no problem with you having a favourable opinion on communism and that's the beauty of democracy - we should be able to discuss topics without resorting to creating personal qualms against each other. Unfortunately, the concept of "agree to disagree" does not work in a totalitarian system.

People advocating socialism/communism aren't advocating a return to totalitarian Soviet style government. That is not what people now mean by socialism or communism, and it isn't what Marx meant by communism either.

 

[The Boy]

Socialism means looking after everybody at the expense of everybody

On the other hand capitalism means looking after your own at the expense of anybody

Communism is just one form of socialism

 

[Florida Man]

I'm personally from a country that was 45 years under a totalitarian communist regime under the umbrella of the Soviet Union. Trust me when I say it's definitely nothing like the utopian views many have.

I would not dispute that every system has its' positives, but to believe that this one in particular holds some moral high ground over democracy or capitalism is crazy, in my opinion. The fact is it did start as some pseudo-moralistic view on equality but with time it transformed in many different ways and had nothing to do with people's well being.

It's a very long topic though, my family has a history of being part of both sides of the coin and the constant ideological struggle is very hard to take for me personally. I absolutely have no problem with you having a favourable opinion on communism and that's the beauty of democracy - we should be able to discuss topics without resorting to creating personal qualms against each other. Unfortunately, the concept of "agree to disagree" does not work in a totalitarian system.

Was the Soviet union truly communist though, at least according to Marxist theory? Part of the reason for this thread is to shed light on the idea that communism and totalitarianism aren’t the same thing. The Soviet interpretation and 100 years of anti Communist propaganda in the west has muddied the definitions.

If you don’t mind me asking, which former Soviet state did you reside?

 

[DoomSlayer]

People advocating socialism/communism aren't advocating a return to totalitarian Soviet style government. That is not what people now mean by socialism or communism, and it isn't what Marx meant by communism either.

History shows otherwise, utopian ideologies never work as intended because they have no realistic and effective way of functioning. As I said, it starts with some sort of good intentions and quickly transforms into an oppressive regime.

The topic on Marx is very long and people have been arguing about it for decades, so I won't go into it. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Was the Soviet union truly communist though, at least according to Marxist theory? Part of the reason for this thread is to shed light on the idea that communism and totalitarianism aren’t the same thing. The Soviet interpretation and 100 years of anti Communist propaganda in the west has muddied the definitions.

If you don’t mind me asking, which former Soviet state did you reside?

I'm from Bulgaria. It's a really long debate if we go into it, for me to fully present and argue my views, I'd have to go into a lot of the history of my country and also the history of the communist movement in the world at that time, how it affected my country, what actions were taken, terrorist attacks included and so on.

My grandfather was part of the Bulgarian Communist Party since his early adulthood but was also the first one in his region to voluntarily get out of it, in 1971, because he was not happy with the way policies were developing and the way the communist elite was forming to be. On the other hand, my father was a strong activist for democracy and capitalism in the late 80s, early 90s when the Cold War ended, the dissolution of USSR was happening and countries from the former Soviet bloc started reforming into democracies in Western style. I've seen and I know from both of them enough to be able to form an opinion on what the positives and negatives are. What I've learned the most is that being totally ideological is not healthy and creates huge problems when it comes to human relationships, because it tends to radicalise people and make them do things they normally would not.

 

[balaks]

Cuba is a country still stuck in the 50s where people are living on $30 per month. Really should not be looked at as a model for success. Why would you want doctors and dish washers to be paid the same wage?

I'm not saying I agree with it, just telling you how it was. Also a lot of the poverty has been directly caused by decades of US sanctions which has punished generations of innocent people for being born into a certain country.

 

[dumbo]

Eat breakfast like a capitalist, lunch like a socialist and dindins like a communist.

 

[Synco]

I'd say anyone who understood the emancipatory impetus of communism had to be in opposition to the totalitarian state-socialist regimes of that time. And these people existed, although they obviously were a minority, caught in the middle of Cold War idiocy after 1945. It also meant to acknowledge that the predominant outcome of the worldwide revolutionary worker's movement was in large parts a practical and moral failure. Which in turn raised far-reaching questions on why things have turned out that way.

A very unattractive position to be in, and the sway of power, identitarianism and false loyalty meant the clear majority of socialists were on the side of the authoritarian regimes. Either because they were full-on party communists, or because they blinded themselves to the violence and oppression these regimes (and their partial social achievements) rested upon.

I don't know much about Cuba, btw.

 

[rcoobc]

Eat breakfast like a capitalist, lunch like a socialist and dindins like a communist.

Why?

 

[do.ob]

Some illustrations on capitalist vs communist regarding split Germany.

Spoiler

average wage

a map showing how many percent drop out of school:

a map denoting the regional distribution of far right (AFD) and far left (Die Linke) votes in Germany

for reference: