What, exactly, is socialism? Again this discussion seems necessary.

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by Kode, Aug 19, 2018.

  1. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, all things don't begin small. A new oil refinery or new pipeline requires a lot of capital. A new office tower might cost $1b.
     
  2. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The government owns and operates public schools. Just to clarify ... you say they're not socialist?
     
  3. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You seem to think government=socialism. That's based on cliche, nothing more.

    Was the Conservative Government's nationalisation of Rolls Royce an act of socialism? Of course not. It would be ridiculous to say otherwise.
     
  4. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Unfortunately, socialism--either collective ownership or worker ownership--doesn't work very well in a modern economy where large amounts of capital are required.
     
  5. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Government-run production is a form of collective ownership, but it certainly isn't the only form.
    Sure, that's why I brought up "collective ownership" and "worker ownership."
    It was a bailout, no?
     
  6. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,309
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ooooooo good point.

    Public schools aren't socialism. It's not valid to pick apart a society and label one activity or policy as "socialist" and another as "capitalist" or another as "feudalist". The only actually valid and worthy conversation that doesn't disarm the people by sowing confusion is the one that recognizes that the economy and economic system is the foundation of the society and that education (for example) is determined by that foundation and in fact springs from it. The "shakers and movers" in the economy "collectively" express their need for workers with certain skills and the educational system, organized to get the job done within that context, sets to work to produce graduates who are ready to take jobs and earn a living doing the jobs that are needed by the economy.

    THEREFORE
    In a capitalist economy, the educational system, however it is organized, serves the economy, and therefore cannot be "socialism" or "socialist".

    The other side of that is that although there is a conversation going on today in certain corners of society that asserts that there is an effort afoot by socialist hiding in society to convert the society from capitalist to socialist by converting one program at a time, one issue at a time, to a socialist-type format until they ultimately take over everything and, voila, you have "socialism", is nonsense that only reflects the utter poverty of understanding of how socialism can happen. Since the economy is the foundation, -and Marx said it is, -and since everything else -education, culture, politics, law, courts, politicians, and police, -spring from the economic base and in service to it, -and Marx said they do, -then the necessary sequence has to be a conversion of the economic base first, and then the conversion of education, culture, politics, laws, etc. etc. will follow. And that is why the communists failed in Russia, China, and in other places where the strategy was to take over politics and political power first. And of course there were other reasons that complicated the situation.
     
  7. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,309
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How can you know that? You can't. You have no evidence. You have no case study.
     
  8. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,309
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    But it isn't socialism. It's a mistake to go to dictionaries published by capitalists to see how they frame socialism, communism, etc. It is necessary to go to Marx for the "leftist" definition of a "leftist" condition or event. And Marx's entire collection of writings boil down to a critique of capitalism and a very brief characterization of the necessary counter-measure for ending capitalism, and that is workers "cast off your chains" and put an end to "wage slavery" by seizing control of the means of production. The format and structure of workers owning and running the MoP must be established first. Later, in the consolidation phase, as socialism becomes more entrenched and "normal", more and more participation of a developed socialist government can begin. But that is many, many years into the future. Bit by bit things will change to support and facilitate worker ownership. Interest free loans may be provided from government funding programs. Assistance with locating sources of needed materials for worker-owned businesses may be developed. And on and on and on. And one day, the government that results will not resemble what we have today. It can't since it would serve a different economic base. It must be adapted to new needs.
     
  9. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't want to read through this entire thread in the hope of finding someone who is willing to set out their definition of socialism. Did you set yours out in a message?
    Yeah, well--I don't buy that thinking, either.
    Convert to what? How?

    I don't happpen to see a way from here to a there of a communist society envisioned by Marx. (Yes, I'm aware of supposed interim steps.)
    I'd like to see someone address the mechanism for amassing large amounts of capital required for major enterprises, how we replace labor no longer required, and how we allocate scarce resources like land, airwaves, water, and the option to pollute.
     
  10. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have evidence and reasoning why various models people suggest for a socialist economy won't work. What's your model?
     
  11. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Dictionaries identify word usage, not how capitalists frame socialism or communism.
    Marx died 135 years ago. Why do we have to "go to Marx?"
    IOW, Marx didn't have answers.
    Workers struggle for...? Whatever comes to mind?
    Why interest free? Where does the capital come from? Who decides on who gets what?
    Like developing a new mine?
    Lots on nice sentiments...
     
  12. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,309
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes. Often. Socialism is worker ownership and control of the productive forces, i.e. "business".

    That is how capitalism developed, mostly. It started out with small merchants and small manufacturing businesses trading goods, and then gold, etc.

    As time went on and businessmen learned and began to see a need for organizing and for support services and protections, etc., city governments provided more and more to help the businesses succeed and were also "bought" by rich merchants. Businesses grew and government adapted on and on to what we have today. The same will happen with socialism. Gradual changes provide opportunities to correct errors and adapt without a total failure on a big scale like we saw with Russia and China.

    To a form more consistent with the new needs as they evolve. People will call for changes to help them overcome difficulties and the obligation of a government, -especially a socialist government, -is to provide for legitimate needs, right? Sure.

    Marx said communist society would automatically happen as classes and the state "wither away". That will take many generations, --IF it ever happens. It's just a very distant theory and I wish Marx hadn't bothered mentioning it because you and your kids and their kids will never see it even if the US turns to socialism over the next year.

    That's a huge discussion in itself, but it will begin small with worker-owned co-ops. Contrary to how anti-Marxists like to portray it, there is no formula. There is no playbook that dictates what is needed, when, and how. It's all really a matter of rational evolution. If co-ops prosper and abound, that in itself will produce a whole set of needs in order to accommodate such changes effectively. Bit by bit things will advance. It's human nature.

    Establish co-ops, press for worker-coop legislation like 6 states already have done (MA, R.I., NC, TX, CA, NY). Press for passage of S.1O82 and HR.2357. Keep moving forward. Little by little.
     
  13. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,309
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ya think? My rather old American Heritage Dictionary (1973) defines fascism as "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
    Not long afterward dictionary publishers were mostly bought up by large publishing houses in mergers and acquisitions. At the point the definition changed. Try to find one today that identifies fascism as being a right wing phenomenon.

    Because no one has done such a thorough, detailed, precise job of critiquing capitalism sine Marx.

    IOW you're looking for a way to discredit him and baseless slanders will do.
     
  14. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Government production is a natural part of capitalism, as illustrated by distinction between private and public good. The government=socialism cliche is therefore nonsensical.

    We have an example of how government is a key economic agent in capitalism, nothing more.
     
  15. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,309
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  16. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  17. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Those pesky economists suggest otherwise...
     
  18. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You won't find many economists who think socialism works.
     
  19. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Based on what? Let's have your economics critique, rather than just pretending to understand what is said. Refer to the economics which says 'socialism doesn't work'. Make sure there is detail, rather than cliche.
     
  20. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If socialism is worker ownership... it doesn't work where large amounts of capital are involved and there are few workers--stuff like pipelines, hydro transmission lines, nuclear reactors (secrets involved, too), risk involved (startups). It also doesn't work where labor is replaced by capital.

    If socialism is collective ownership... it doesn't work where risk is involved (startups), and capital is replacing labor (politics is involved),

    If you want a discussion, let's work from a common definition of socialism. We can then look at some of the individual cases.
     
  21. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Irrelevant effort. You're ultimately referring to limitations in capitalism with SMEs. Socialism has no problem with investment. Indeed, its typically more significant (as we shift from consumer-based capitalism).

    Is this supposed to be meaningful? For someone so insistent in stating socialism cannot work, you're strangely free of detail. Try to put that right.

    I don't want a discussion. You're using that to hide from the economics. I want you to give an in-depth account of why socialism cannot work. That should involve political economy, economic theory detail and empirical evidence. Please do so in your next post and stop hiding.
     
  22. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Uh huh.

    So, who will accumulate capital to build a new pipeline if not the government? Workers? Will the small number of workers own the pipeline? Can they sell it? Is there a potential profit to be made on operations? If they can't sell it or make a profit, why should they care about its success or failure? If a worker dies, does his family get his share? Part of his share? What if they don't want to work there? What if they do but they aren't qualified?

    I taught school. A new school employing 100 teachers might cost $30m. So, 100 of us want to build one. Someone (who?) gives us the money. Do we get to run the school as we please? You're going to send your children to a school where you don't have a say? Why do you get a say in my workplace? What if some of us do a lousy job? Who says what happens? The students? Their parents? The other teachers? What happens to the fired teacher's share? What if a teacher is okay, but a much better one comes along?

    My pals and I are firefighters. We run our workplace and decide saving you and your burning house are too risky....

    Want more examples?
    You're going to tell people to "shift," are you? Chew a bit on my questions and examples.
    I just gave you a couple of examples. Deal with 'em.
    No surprise to me.
    Who's hiding?
    I'm just getting started with examples.
    As long as you don't name-call and stay engaged, I'll keep going.
     
  23. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No economics.

    No economics

    No economics

    No economics

    This is what I asked for: I want you to give an in-depth account of why socialism cannot work. That should involve political economy, economic theory detail and empirical evidence. Please do so in your next post and stop hiding.

    Drivel! Please give economic argument over why socialism must fail. That should involve political economy, economic theory detail and empirical evidence. Please do so in your next post and stop hiding.
     
  24. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You're just avoiding my questions. Here they are again...

    So, who will accumulate capital to build a new pipeline if not the government? Workers? Will the small number of workers own the pipeline? Can they sell it? Is there a potential profit to be made on operations? If they can't sell it or make a profit, why should they care about its success or failure? If a worker dies, does his family get his share? Part of his share? What if they don't want to work there? What if they do but they aren't qualified?

    I taught school. A new school employing 100 teachers might cost $30m. So, 100 of us want to build one. Someone (who?) gives us the money. Do we get to run the school as we please? You're going to send your children to a school where you don't have a say? Why do you get a say in my workplace? What if some of us do a lousy job? Who says what happens? The students? Their parents? The other teachers? What happens to the fired teacher's share? What if a teacher is okay, but a much better one comes along?

    My pals and I are firefighters. We run our workplace and decide saving you and your burning house are too risky....

    If you answer my questions, we can apply economic theory to your answers.
    Will you agree to some answers to the questions so we can apply theory to your answers?

    Start with the pipeline.
     
  25. FatBack

    FatBack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    52,286
    Likes Received:
    48,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    “A socialist is just someone who is unable to get over his or her astonishment that most people who have lived and died have spent lives of wretched, fruitless, unremitting toil.”
    ― Terry Eagleton, Ideology: An Introduction
    The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money. Margaret Thatcher
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/socialism
    Socialism states that you owe me something simply because I exist. Capitalism, by contrast, results in a sort of reality-forced altruism: I may not want to help you, I may dislike you, but if I don't give you a product or service you want, I will starve. Voluntary exchange is more moral than forced redistribution. Ben Shapiro
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/socialism

    When people are desperate or wealthy, they turn to socialism; only when they have no other alternative do they embrace the free market. After all, lies about guaranteed security are far more seductive than lectures about personal responsibility. Ben Shapiro
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/socialism

    Socialism requires that government becomes your god. Rafael Cruz
    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/socialism
    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page