What does socialism mean to you?

I see socialism as a response to the lust for wealth, power, recognition and control that tends to be found in individuals, corporations and nations. Socialism in some form is necessary for infrastructure, public schools and colleges, social security, medicare and medicaid, national parks, and any public program. The absence of socialism would be a disaster. Socialism taken to extreme would also be a disaster.
If there were no greed, we might not need government. There would be philanthropy and caring to take care of everything. Since I have met very few angels, we are stuck with government and "socialist" programs. When it snows in Michigan, I am thankful for the "socialist" snowplows to clear the streets.
Individualism is necessary for society to grow and improve. Ingenuity and hard work should be rewarded. Greed should not be rewarded.
Everyone should have the opportunity and resources to grow and express their individualism. This would provide the maximum benefit to our nation and society. O course, this is "socialism".
So, I guess that both capitalism and socialism are good, if there is not too much or too little of either one.

 

How many friends I have on Facebook. How many Instagram followers and Twitter followers I have. How many parties I get invited to. That's socialism to me.

 

I like Rush's definition. Everybody is equally miserable under socialism.

 

Because eventually, the hard working will grow tired of supporting the lazy. Living standards and services will deplete.

 

That cannot happen in a functioning socialist collective. Non-productive members are expelled. Or rather, if you don't want to pull your weight, you won't volunteer in the first place.

 

1) Socialism is any group which has voluntarily agreed to pool resources for the betterment of the entirety. Some examples are the extended family living together, a small village, or a self-sufficient commune.

2) I don't hate it.

3) My version demands nothing from those who don't volunteer for it. Of those who volunteer for it, it demands commitment to full participation (ie, work).

4) None. You can be whoever you want to be, as long as you pull your weight and don't expect any special accommodations. If you want the kind of 'liberty' which allows for opting out, or the expression of overt individuality, you need to stick with capitalism.

5) Which comes first depends upon whether you're a capitalist or a socialist.

 

Like Communism, socialism is the the exact opposite of freedom. By its nature it is extremely unfair. There is nothing, absolutely nothing fair, no freedom, etc involved in taking from one person and giving to another person, by force. When a person is not able to keep the fruits of his labor, freedom ceases to exist.

Capitalism is the free exchange of goods and services. it is fair. it is unbiased. You provide a service (work), you get paid an agreed upon wage. If the wage is inadequate, you move to another job. If the labor is inadequate, the employer finds another employee.

There is nothing 'free' about a socialist society, which is why they always, 100% of the time fail. It is an extremely unfair economical system that promises the world but delivers nothing

 

The most financially strong countries are all socialist countries to varying degrees.

Canada, Germany, Norway, Finland, UK....

 

You could not be more wrong. Every functioning and stable family is a communist collective. Every small agrarian village. What they ALL demand is that every member participates and produces, no exceptions. When you work at little or no surplus (as in a family or peasant village), you simply cannot afford to carry more than a tiny percentage of non-productive members. Usually there is only enough for the very aged, and even these still contribute in small ways.

The only system which actually affords the surplus to carry non-productive members, is capitalism.

 

Yeah yeah. Get back to me when those countries get 1/10th the population of the US, starts paying for their own military's, provide the foreign aid that we do, and most importantly, are 'blessed' with the 'diversity' that the US has

 

Where do you think the money for all that good living comes from? And more importantly, how do you think they retain that standard of living? NOT from allowing vast numbers of people to remain unproductive!

 

Right. Which is why anything bigger than an immediate family unit always fails. And if they don't fail, they certainly don't prosper. You want to point to some hut village in Africa as an example of socialism being successful? How about the old hippie communes? I guess it's cool if you're into wearing the same clothes every day, hunting and gathering wild game, etc.

So if socialism doesn't work in a peasant village in Afganistan, you expect it to work in a country with 300 million people? lol

 

A lot of it comes from the US.
The Nordic countries have almost 0 diversity in the population. They don't have millions of people that hate their own country, refuse to be productive members of society, and actively look to exploit the country.
And as mentioned, Norway has 5 million people. We have 300 million.

 

Where did I say they were a 'success' (as measured by capitalists)? I didn't. You're measuring with your capitalist eyes, and see only lack of surplus. To the person who PREFERS collective living (and many claim they do, though baulk at the reality .. ie, cafe socialists), any group which sustains it over many years is a success. And many groups larger than a nuclear family do indeed, sustain it. Religious groups, agrarian villages (where water and other resources are shared), multi-generational families all living together, hippie communes, etc etc.

 

Yes, that was my point. Uniformity of effort and culture are essential to the success of any socialism.

 

So Norway has an open border with a 3rd world country?

 

An economic system when applied in a practical way will help to minimize the worst abuses of capitalism. What DOES NOT work is when it is applied to its purest form that is communism in the effort to reach some kind of utopia.

Example: In Venezuela, money and land were thrown around like candy to the poor with no investment for future economic prosperity like education and healthcare etc.

Meanwhile in Norway, petroleum is nationalized and the left in Norway want to save the money made by oil for future need while the right want to spend it on road building. Neither are suggesting to privatize it.

 

socialist hate free thinkers, they require subservients once they get enough servants they'll become the totalitarianists that they actually are...

those that push for socialusm are either dupes or the leaders lusting for power...

 

It's simply the concept that human beings must live in a Society in order to survive as a species. We are not biologically apt to survive living in isolation. So we form communities.

N/A I don't hate socialism. :However, I do believe that doing what is right always trumps any ideology.

Living in a society requires that individuals act to strengthen society. Anything that weakens society must be deemed immoral.

However, let's keep in mind that we live in several levels of "societies". From "near" to "far" I would broadly categorize them as follows

Family
Neighborhood
City
Region
Country
Continent
World

These are not necessarily "geographical" categories. For example, "Neighborhood" may refer to your extended family, and not necessarily to your next door neighbor. This may slightly vary from person to person so long as the general principle is kept..

We have the responsibility to defend our societies. If any conflict exists, they are resolved from the inside out. This is why our responsibility to our family comes before anything else. It is "instinctive". We usually tend to "root" for our home team first, and many people like candidates from their own State (or region).

Everybody has individual rights that are only limited by the individual rights of others.

The question would only come into play if there is a conflict. There would only be conflict if the individual profit is a result of abuse, in which case it would be infringing on the rights of others. So, from the above, the answer would be obvious.

 

Socialism is me taking care of my family.

That BS the left keeps pushing is just tyranny.