The great achievements and advancements of Socialism

[PureX]

It only stands to reason that those things you mentioned should ever be so. I would hate to see those things be eliminated.

Human nature needs an update if they dont see a need for those things.

And yet the unfettered greed of capitalism is eliminating these things in the U.S, inexorably.

 

[ChristineM]

It's called social security not capitalist security

I didnt mention capitalist anything, your post didnt make sense to me

 

[WalterTrull]

I didnt mention capitalist anything, your post didnt make sense to me

I was just subtly inferring that we ARE a fairly socialist state. Even our capitalist ventures are now pandering to socialist aspirations in their advertising ("Buy and we'll donate.")

 

[ChristineM]

I was just subtly inferring that we ARE a fairly socialist state. Even our capitalist ventures are now pandering to socialist aspirations in their advertising ("Buy and we'll donate.")

I understood reading your second post.

It it work, even in capitalist america.

 

[Curious George]

Yeah, I am going with public school.

 

[shunyadragon]

Thank you, this was also in my mind as well. I thought it when I was in a Hispanic neighborhood yesterday, where a garage-turned-multiple residence as well as a trailer were discovered behind a home on a property where multiple families were all living here in Los Angeles.

OK

...I was thinking about how that communal "village" was ugly, and imagined myself growing up there, how I might consider my life living that way. I would have less hopes and dreams, because I would be caught up blending too much with those around me. I would be destined to just "blend" for my entire life, living up to others expectations around me - the elders, the neighbors, etc.

This is a pesimistic, and unrealistic view of ancient cultures. Actually by the evidence this view is not reality. Human nature has not changed since humans were human. There is even evidence that humans even cared for the disabled and elderly. In one form or another what you described above is still apart of today's culture as it always has.

I find that style of life outdated. I find individual family units (and individualism itself) more desirable than communal life.

The reality is individual family units did exist in the Neolithic, but often a broader family unit, but not individualism. There was a strong dependency on cooperative communalism and inter-dependency of a group which evolved into the tribal hierarchy in the later Stone Age. Also trade was the earliest form of Capitalism and goes back in the archaeological evidence since humans were known to be human.

 

[shunyadragon]

The problem is that the economics of cultures evolved over time, and there is no such thing as a pure capitalist nor socialist economic system. Humans have have been opportunistically adaptive concerning various economic models over time. They cannot be discreetly separated and rated.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Aren't all religions intrinsically socialist?

No.

 

[WalterTrull]

No.

While I love succinct, in this case I wouldn't mind a wee bit of exposition.

 

[Cooky]

The various "safety net"programs to help those in need and to offer protection.

When I had a DUI in 2008, it took a while for the processing to go through, and so, I took a job in the meantime and then once the paperwork was filed, I ended up being fired because the company lied and said I lied on my paperwork.

...So for one full year, I was unable to collect unemployment, because my appeals were all denied. I ended up living in a tent half the year, and the other half in my car, begging for food and my kids lived in Arizona with my parents because I was hoping for a job that was never coming (all jobs in my construction field seemed to require a CDL).

More recently, however, I collected unemployment after a layoff, and then when I went back to work, I kept collecting for a long time. I also, claim 99 dependents on my state taxes now, and have ever since and have collected over $50,000. In cash.

Paybacks are a *****.
I won't stop.
Whenever they come after me, I quit and get a new job. It usually takes half a year or longer for the paperwork to catch up, which gives me plenty of time to jump ship again and again and again and again.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The problem is that the economics of cultures evolved over time, and there is no such thing as a pure capitalist nor socialist economic system. Humans have have been opportunistically adaptive concerning various economic models over time. They cannot be discreetly separated and rated.

This point is so basic, yet so commonly lost.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

While I love succinct, in this case I wouldn't mind a wee bit of exposition.

*chuckles*
Fair call.

Religions are so wide ranging, it's almost impossible for them to be all anything.
Further, when talking from an economic viewpoint, some are more agnostic than anything.

I'd be comfortable with 'many' or perhaps even 'most'...not sure, I'd need to think. But all...nah...

Some examples include 'Prosperity Theology', or some of the cargo cults of the Pacifics.
Actually, the cargo cult examples are quite interesting, since many of those societies are by nature socialist (children being literally raised by the village) yet at times a belief that God is a provider of material wealth to the deserving has been very active.

In both case, wealth of an individual is correlated with 'correct' religious behaviour.

 

[Cooky]

This point is so basic, yet so commonly lost.

Tell that to Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders -self proclaimed "Socialists" whatever that means.

 

[shunyadragon]

Tell that to Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders -self proclaimed "Socialists" whatever that means.

In this contemporary world claiming to be a socialist means you support universal medical coverage (not a bad idea in one form or another even with private insurance coverage!) and more equitable taxation, in other words tax the 'wealthy.' Our economic system in the USA is too complicated and involved to be Capitalist nor Socialist, nor any variation of State Mercantilism.

Our economy and politics are in mix where no single candidate can get very far imposing either socialism nor capitalism, but tRump is sure trying to make government corporately controlled and owned.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Tell that to Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders -self proclaimed "Socialists" whatever that means.

Or, indeed, to any self-proclaimed capitalists.
Your society is a blend of both, as is mine. The mixes might vary, but the fact remains.

 

[Altfish]

I can only speak for the UK but if it hadn't been for socialism we would not have...

• The National Health Service
• Free Education for all
• The Welfare State
• Worker's Rights
• Minimum Wage
• Health & Safety Laws
• Environmental Standards
• etc., etc.

I agree that many of these are now accepted by capitalism BUT initially they were dragged kicking and screaming about profits and factory closures - then they realised how popular they were.

 

[wellwisher]

A good contrast between Socialism and Capitalism were the Pilgrims.

The Pilgrims’ earliest settlement, by today’s standards, was essentially a socialist commune. The settlers received their clothing, food, and supplies from the colony’s “common stock,” all farmland was collectively owned, and each family received provisions according to their needs, with the profits of labor being divided equally rather than by what was earned through hard work.

This system quickly led to discontent: The healthy and able-bodied colonists who worked in the fields all day began to resent the colonists who claimed to be ill, frustrated that they received the same amount of food and supplies as those who performed zero labor. The socialist system was also harmful to the health of the Pilgrims: Nearly half of the colonists died of starvation during their first winter in the New World, unable to feed themselves and stay healthy with the colony’s shrinking harvest sizes.

After about two years of famine and disaffection, the Pilgrims finally had a meeting amongst themselves and chose to abandon the socialist system for all of the suffering it had caused. The colony’s new system required each family to take care of themselves, and made the settlers personally responsible for their own means of survival. Colonists were encouraged to grow their own food knowing that there was no “common stock” to provide for them. This led to the entire colony becoming more prosperous—those who earlier claimed to be infirm became motivated and industrious, with men, women, and youth alike working in the fields eager to reap the benefits of their labor. Interestingly, the settlers in the Jamestown colony went through the same experience and passed a rule: “If you don’t work, you don’t eat.”

The many achievements of Socialism in America, during the 20th century, have occurred because Capitalism was already in place and had built a huge capacitance of wealth; the goose that lays the golden eggs was there first. Capitalism could compensate for the productivity problems of Socialism. In the case of the Pilgrims, Socialism came first, before any capacitance was created. This becomes a disaster. Name me one Socialist achievement that is self standing and does not need anything from Capitalism; taxes, to prop it up?

In 20th century America, Socialism was reintroduced, but it began with a Goose that lays the golden egg, to help offset the costs and its innate lack of productivity of Socialism. This Capitalist buffet compensates for the downside of Socialism, but only for so long, if Socialism expands too fast or too much.

This over expansion happened in Venezuela. Venezuela started as a wealthy country with natural oil resources. The Socialist movement created class envy and then promised freebies, leading to a Socialist overthrow. Once the Capitalist capacitance was bled dry, the culture started to go down the tubes. They are back to first Pilgrim settlement, ready to go back to Capitalism to rebuild the capacitance.

The problem with the latest Democrat version of Socialism, is the cost is already more than all the eggs of the 21th century golden goose of Capitalism. They tell us not to worry about the cost, since the money can be stolen as taxes or printed by government. They say nothing of Socialism earning this money. This translates to mean they will use all the eggs and then cook the goose. After that, then we are all in trouble, as we a default back to the first Pilgrim settlement. On the bright side, leadership in Socialist countries do well for themselves, since stealing and squandering is legal for Socialist leadership. Name me one Socialist dictator who is not a self gathered billionaire?

All in all Capitalism is self standing, while Socialism tends to be a parasite that has a track record of over bleeding its host, until the goose is cooked. A 75% tax rate is huge blood donation. If capitalism can stand its ground, it can then withstand some blood letting by socialism, so socialism can appear to be effective.

How about a Socialist experiment where it is required to be self sufficient and cannot parasite. This can occur on a small scale; hippy commune, but it has problems when scaled beyond a certain level; implodes without a host.

 

[Stevicus]

Let us explore the great achievements born out of socialism, and compare them to the great achievements and advancements of Capitalism.

This thread is specifically about positive achievements only. This is about exposing concrete examples and not ideological / political preferential progress. Thank you.

Let us begin.

I'm not sure that either system can boast any great "achievements" - not in and of themselves. However, most of the wealth acquired by the U.S. was done through force, mainly military/government force used in the expansion and securing of territory across the continent. This, coupled with the socialistic Homestead Act, enabled settlers and other private agencies to utilize land and exploit resources for profit.

But to be honest, I'm not sure that you're asking the right question here. It might be more relevant to ask just what, exactly, should the role of government in any society be.

 

[Stevicus]

No thank you, I'll pass on that as That's not related to my objective here. My objective is to explore the achievements of socialism, and to determine if the concept is actually anything worth fighting for. I see politicians like ocacio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders, sort of dividing the Democratic party over this issue as if it's a very important objective.

...I want to get into their mindset and explore it from within. I want to see what they see. I want to see if their concerns are legitimate, or if they're just being rabble-rousers, causing trouble.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to see here. If there are those in poverty or struggling to make ends meet, then it's perfectly natural for people to have simple human decency and compassion for the suffering of others.

For many others, it might be a matter of justice and fairness. For whatever reason, there are those who believe that people who actually do the work should be the ones to get the rewards. The idea of giving obscenely huge salaries and bonuses to superfluous, pencil-pushing executives - while those who actually do the work routinely get the shaft - doesn't set well with some people.

 

[metis]

The many achievements of Socialism in America, during the 20th century, have occurred because Capitalism was already in place and had built a huge capacitance of wealth; the goose that lays the golden eggs was there first.

There's a saying that goes "Everything in moderation, nothing to extreme", and basically all governments in the world today recognize this and have adopted what we call "mixed economies", largely because extreme forms of capitalism or socialism present way too many problems.