Iori Komei
03-23-2008, 03:04 AM
Alright, being that this has come up, and I know atleast two people expressed interest in discussing it.
-
Socialism, it's a very broad ideology that has existed since at least the fifth century to some extent.
The modern idea of Socialism though is generally attributed to political philosophies of the 19th century, especially those of Marx.
Over the last century or so hundreds of movements worldwide that have been based on it to varying extents have arose, in some cases becoming powerful and in other being violently suppressed.
Socialism has been described in varying ways, the so called Communists of the Soviet Union and indeed Marx himself, who stated that he was a Marxist not a Communist (there are differences) have claimed Socialism to be some sort of stepping stone on the path to Communism an/or Marxism.
-
Now that the history part of it is over I'll move on to the more current part, which admittedly is biased towards my view of what Socialism is supposed to be.
I openly admit that I am a Democratic Socialist, something I hate to do since I should'nt even have to add the Democratic part since Socialism is supposed to be Democratic in the first place.
Now my views of Socialism are this;
Socialism is a Socio-Economic system in which people essentially work for three reasons;
1. They enjoy doing what they do.
2. They work to improve themselves.
Now work is really a bad word to use to since it implies some kind of physical labour that one does not really enjoy doing, and that's simply not the case.
The best example of what I'm talking about would be what we see in Star Trek, where money, for the most part does not exist and people do what they like to do and pool post-scarcity resources together for the common good.
I think to the biggest problem with explaining it is that it is very difficult to explain it in normative terms, hence why I use the Star Trek reference.
-
Now I realize that people are'nt going to all the sudden tomorrow stop what they're doing and all the sudden do this, however it does'nt mean it can't or wont happen.
The one thing Marx got right is that society must be transitional in this, that is we go from being simple trading to a more complex supply society where capitalism is used for supplies that are either very valuable or scarce, however we must also realize that completely unregulated capitalism results in the formation of extreme class structures and poverty, hence why capitalism, until the right time as to transition from it, must be regulated.
Now, the transition to a Socialist economic system is not one that we can do today, nor is it something that can or should (in the case it was possible) be done through massive violent revolutions, but rather through Education and Democracy over time.
-
When it comes down to it the only way for Socialism to work is to have a post scarcity society, that is a society where resources are nearly unlimited, however at the same time there must be some limits on this to prevent abuse of the system, like for instance someone hoarding a vast amount of resources.
Now the only real way this will come about is from becoming a truly space based society, one which not only live, but thrives throughout space and has tapped into the truly massive amounts of resources that lye not only in our own Solar System, but throughout the Universe.
Now some may say, well even those are limited, how does that solve the problem, well in that they would be correct, technically the amount of all resources in the Universe (bar some physics altering discovery) are technically Finite, however they are still massive.
For instance a single 10 kilometer Iron asteroid has more Iron in it than all the Iron that has ever been mined on Earth.
-
Now, I think one of the biggest problem Socialism has faced is the stance on Private Property.
While this may be an issue in which there has never been a single common agreement, Private Property is relatively new and indeed as far back as ancient Iran was opposed by the people, however at the same time Private Property is truly essential to the Human race, if in no other way then psychological.
Now I'm not against Private Property, I however do believe in limits, especially on land, however these need to be fair limits, for instance a person should be able to own 10 acres of land to farm, or turn into a nature preserve or build on, however there does need to be an upper limit to this and regulations on some land.
Now adding to the above I would add the more Environmentalist mind set that people should'nt be able to turn a pristine forest into a shopping mall or something like that.
-
The second biggest problem that I think is attributed to Socialism is the idea that Socialism is restrictive in every way and in unfree and undemocratic, this however is far from the truth.
I'll be the first to admit the Soviet Union, Cuba, PRChina and many of the Communist countries are quite frankly unacceptable when it comes down to freedom and Democracy, however those countries are/were based on an augmented version of a flawed idea of Socialism.
Socialism, by its very nature is Democratic, Socialism is an economic system of and for the people.
Now Social freedoms I think tend to be the things that tend to get beaten up upon the most in those kinds of nations, and indeed as Socialism is meant to be purely economic mentions nothing of them, however for a society to be truly great, to be productive and to be willing to work for the common good people must be free, not simply as some Altruistic gesture, but because Freedom is the natural state of the Human animal, that is if you took someone who was not raised in any kind of culture, they would not seek to be submissive, but would seek freedom, as it is the most natural non-biological act.
-
In the end, in the near term I am a Social Democrat who believes in Keynesian economics, but in the long run I am a true [Democratic] Socialist.
So, Thoughts, Opinion, Romans?
-
Socialism, it's a very broad ideology that has existed since at least the fifth century to some extent.
The modern idea of Socialism though is generally attributed to political philosophies of the 19th century, especially those of Marx.
Over the last century or so hundreds of movements worldwide that have been based on it to varying extents have arose, in some cases becoming powerful and in other being violently suppressed.
Socialism has been described in varying ways, the so called Communists of the Soviet Union and indeed Marx himself, who stated that he was a Marxist not a Communist (there are differences) have claimed Socialism to be some sort of stepping stone on the path to Communism an/or Marxism.
-
Now that the history part of it is over I'll move on to the more current part, which admittedly is biased towards my view of what Socialism is supposed to be.
I openly admit that I am a Democratic Socialist, something I hate to do since I should'nt even have to add the Democratic part since Socialism is supposed to be Democratic in the first place.
Now my views of Socialism are this;
Socialism is a Socio-Economic system in which people essentially work for three reasons;
1. They enjoy doing what they do.
2. They work to improve themselves.
Now work is really a bad word to use to since it implies some kind of physical labour that one does not really enjoy doing, and that's simply not the case.
The best example of what I'm talking about would be what we see in Star Trek, where money, for the most part does not exist and people do what they like to do and pool post-scarcity resources together for the common good.
I think to the biggest problem with explaining it is that it is very difficult to explain it in normative terms, hence why I use the Star Trek reference.
-
Now I realize that people are'nt going to all the sudden tomorrow stop what they're doing and all the sudden do this, however it does'nt mean it can't or wont happen.
The one thing Marx got right is that society must be transitional in this, that is we go from being simple trading to a more complex supply society where capitalism is used for supplies that are either very valuable or scarce, however we must also realize that completely unregulated capitalism results in the formation of extreme class structures and poverty, hence why capitalism, until the right time as to transition from it, must be regulated.
Now, the transition to a Socialist economic system is not one that we can do today, nor is it something that can or should (in the case it was possible) be done through massive violent revolutions, but rather through Education and Democracy over time.
-
When it comes down to it the only way for Socialism to work is to have a post scarcity society, that is a society where resources are nearly unlimited, however at the same time there must be some limits on this to prevent abuse of the system, like for instance someone hoarding a vast amount of resources.
Now the only real way this will come about is from becoming a truly space based society, one which not only live, but thrives throughout space and has tapped into the truly massive amounts of resources that lye not only in our own Solar System, but throughout the Universe.
Now some may say, well even those are limited, how does that solve the problem, well in that they would be correct, technically the amount of all resources in the Universe (bar some physics altering discovery) are technically Finite, however they are still massive.
For instance a single 10 kilometer Iron asteroid has more Iron in it than all the Iron that has ever been mined on Earth.
-
Now, I think one of the biggest problem Socialism has faced is the stance on Private Property.
While this may be an issue in which there has never been a single common agreement, Private Property is relatively new and indeed as far back as ancient Iran was opposed by the people, however at the same time Private Property is truly essential to the Human race, if in no other way then psychological.
Now I'm not against Private Property, I however do believe in limits, especially on land, however these need to be fair limits, for instance a person should be able to own 10 acres of land to farm, or turn into a nature preserve or build on, however there does need to be an upper limit to this and regulations on some land.
Now adding to the above I would add the more Environmentalist mind set that people should'nt be able to turn a pristine forest into a shopping mall or something like that.
-
The second biggest problem that I think is attributed to Socialism is the idea that Socialism is restrictive in every way and in unfree and undemocratic, this however is far from the truth.
I'll be the first to admit the Soviet Union, Cuba, PRChina and many of the Communist countries are quite frankly unacceptable when it comes down to freedom and Democracy, however those countries are/were based on an augmented version of a flawed idea of Socialism.
Socialism, by its very nature is Democratic, Socialism is an economic system of and for the people.
Now Social freedoms I think tend to be the things that tend to get beaten up upon the most in those kinds of nations, and indeed as Socialism is meant to be purely economic mentions nothing of them, however for a society to be truly great, to be productive and to be willing to work for the common good people must be free, not simply as some Altruistic gesture, but because Freedom is the natural state of the Human animal, that is if you took someone who was not raised in any kind of culture, they would not seek to be submissive, but would seek freedom, as it is the most natural non-biological act.
-
In the end, in the near term I am a Social Democrat who believes in Keynesian economics, but in the long run I am a true [Democratic] Socialist.
So, Thoughts, Opinion, Romans?