Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see. So then if we're socialist, then why all the protests for more spending on entitlements, more taxes on rich people, more government control of the economy?
So we have socialist elements in this country. That's true, but that does not make us an example of socialism. I mean, there are eskimos in Alaska, which is part of the United States. Does that make us an eskimo nation?
Yes, that's the expected answer. Of course, we have individual cities that are more populous than some entire Scandinavian nations. For example, New York City alone has close to twice the population of Denmark. I don't think I'm alone in that when I say socialism doesn't work, I mean in a large nation. If you have a geographically small nation with a tiny population and a limited economy with homogeneous demographics then sure socialism can work. Under those circumstances, virtually any governmental structure could work. It's when you have a large landmass with complex economy filled with a big population of diverse groups that socialism is unworkable.
So the person making comments about ignorant Americans is claiming that the United States is a socialist nation. Got it.
And that person would be correct if the definition of socialism as bandied about on here by Americans were anywhere near correct. Using just those markers you attribute to other countries to define them as socialist; the U.S would be at the head of the parade
Originally Posted by kidkaos2 View Post
I see. So then if we're socialist, then why all the protests for more spending on entitlements, more taxes on rich people, more government control of the economy?
So we have socialist elements in this country. That's true, but that does not make us an example of socialism.
Ignorance is thinking that one morning you wake up and we are full fledge socialist. When you have a population that learned that they can sit on their duff and still get fed then we are one step closer to socialism.
It seems to be a uniquely American error to believe social benefits equals socialism. From the American viewpoint, social policies and capitalism become points on the same line, and more of one must necessarily mean less of the other.
For example, Norway has universal health care, free university education, 5 weeks vacation, a year of maternity/paternity leave and a host of other social benefits. Denmark has similar benefits. From the US point of view, this is pretty socialist. Yet both countries have a ferocious capitalist sector with higher levels of entrepeneurship than America.
To other countries, social benefits are political settings, socialism and capitalism are economic systems. You can in fact regulate both independently.
I'm sooo jealous! I wish I lived in Norway, or Denmark. I can't imagine how nice it would be to have a family there.
I think the difference is that America has a capitalist government as well. Other countries have a socialist government for the people while having a capitalist economy. Some countries have a social economy and a social government.
I think America is the only country with a capitalist government (by name that is) if I'm not mistaken.
Its works like this
Let me splain u
B4 a few worked hard and made lots of cash
But Most people did nothing
The leaders of the nothing said "the rich --they didn't build it - they stole it from us
The nothing people then mugged the rich but their leaders kept the loot and killed or jailed anybody that did not like it
Now except for the mob leaders all are poor and that is our bedtime story of socialism
Last edited by Huckleberry3911948; 06-21-2014 at 03:22 PM..
Reason: py
BruSan, thank you. That was clearly and excellently given. I don't think the wealthy 1% as they are called in America are taxed enough! That puts me squarely in the middle of socialist tendencies, but at the same time I think capitalist strategies that are regulated to avoid corruption as much as possible is what motivates the market, market meaning more than the financial world, it includes industry, agriculture, and other professions. I've been reading Thomas Piketty's book Capital as well as Richard Wolff's Democracy at Work. I'm getting the basic education missed in college!
With all this Occupy Wall Street protesting going on, it seems that these people are advocating a more socialist government. But, has socialism ever worked over the long term, to the point that it would be better than capitalist U.S. policy? Can someone give me examples of successful socialist countries that have lasted for the LONG TERM and/or will likely last for the LONG TERM? Should the U.S. envy other socialist countries? Does it really work better as these Occupy Wall Street people believe it would? Honestly, it seems like the Tea Party of the left.
Enlighten me.
How about Socialist Democracies?
Denmark,Sweden,Switzerland,Norway,Belgium,Holland, Finland,Greenland,Iceland,are all better off.
America has become a disgusting Fascist nation!
Facism is a political ideology that seeks to regenerate the social, economic, and cultural life of a country by basing it on a heightened sense of national belonging or ethnic identity. Fascism rejects liberal ideas such as freedom and individual rights, and opposes free elections, legislatures, and other elements of democracy. Fascism is strongly associated with right-wing fanaticism, racism, totalitarianism, and violence.
Our fathers fought fascists,they didn't vote for them,so why are we?
America. Where the real terrorists ride in limousines.'American Government'~AKA- THE WORLDS RICHEST PROSTITUTES!!!!!!
We've had socialism for roughly the past 100 years, there really isn't any purely socialist countries.
There's also the Scandinavian countries.
That's about the time we started raping countries and murdering third world dictators and installing puppet government only to later be murdered again and replaced with another puppet government.
Here in Finland the name of the party is not "Socialist Democracies", it is "Social Democracies".
Example, single person can be social but this dont mean that he/she is socialist...Same with party and this party is not socialist party and they dont want Finland to be socialist country.
I am not voting this party but I think that main reason for word "Social" on the name of this party is that they want every induvidial to be equal example on education and health care, this means that education here is free for all citizens...And I think also that is "must" for small nation like us, we need to have "All hands on deck" and sure we can not waste "great young brains" if her/his parents dont have money to put for education.
So, this is not socialist policy, its social policy and it works here but maybe not in bigger nation....Each country needs its own formula and that formula is depending from many things.
What comes to socialist/communist countries, there is not succesfull countries on this category and there will not be in future either (China is not good example on this case because it just "Wanna be" communist and is now pure capitalist country) .
Sure each socialist/communist country have some peoples who are doing/living well and normally they are leading persons from party and/or military.
Also need to say that what comes to democraty, I am quite sure that we have here more that than example at US and same with freedom..but again, its question of the size of nation.
Example, if giving same freedom for all chinese what we have here, China would broke to hundred pieces.
With all this Occupy Wall Street protesting going on, it seems that these people are advocating a more socialist government. But, has socialism ever worked over the long term, to the point that it would be better than capitalist U.S. policy? Can someone give me examples of successful socialist countries that have lasted for the LONG TERM and/or will likely last for the LONG TERM? Should the U.S. envy other socialist countries? Does it really work better as these Occupy Wall Street people believe it would? Honestly, it seems like the Tea Party of the left.
Enlighten me.
So far, the world has only seen one (arguably) genuine socialist revolution, the Russian Revolution of 1917. That revolution was essentially defeated by 1922, when the soviets (i.e. workers' councils) broke down as a result of the chaos and starvation caused by the civil war. The Party bureaucracy stepped in to fill the void left by the soviets, Lenin died, Stalin took power, and the rest is well-known history. The soviet-style "communism" that reigned in Eastern Europe was socialist in name only. It was, in truth, completely anti-socialist. It was a form of state-capitalist totalitarian dictatorship that tried to justify its existence by claiming to be "building socialism."
Subsequent "socialist" revolutions in China, Cuba, North Korea, etc. were really nationalist revolutions that borrowed vocabulary and organizational ideas from Stalin's Russia. There was nothing remotely socialist about any of them.
If you want to see socialism's real legacy, it is to be found in the social democratic systems of Scandinavia. Although still capitalist countries in many ways, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway probably come closer to the genuine ideals of socialism than any other countries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
