Debate heats up: Capitalism vs. Socialism

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The looming battle between free market capitalism and socialism is now on the front burners of discussion. How one considers the "free market" depends on how one views human beings.

If everyone and everything were all sweetness and light, socialism would be the way to go for a society. For example, within the traditional family unit resources often are lavished on children, who normally don't and can't earn a dime of their own. This could be rightly called, "domestic socialism," and even the most hardnosed capitalists practice it. But given the history of human beings, a nation of millions cannot operate like one big happy family practicing "domestic socialism."

Socialistic rhetoric might be inspiring to many, but its actual record is dismal. Countries, which for centuries exported food, suddenly found themselves forced to import food to stave off starvation after agriculture was socialized. This has happened all over the world among people of every race. Communism and socialism are two sides of the same coin. Anyone who can remember the contrast between East and West Berlin, Germany, back in the days when communists controlled the East, can have no doubt as to which system produces more economic benefits for ordinary people. Even though the people in both parts of the city were of the same race, culture and history, those living under the communists were painfully poorer, in addition to having fewer freedoms.

President Obama has been accused of being a socialist, but that has yet to be proved. However, if for some reason he decides to move toward socialism, one of the first indicators would be his efforts to try to reduce economic inequality (a byproduct of capitalism) by increasing political inequality, which is essentially what socialism is all about. Historically, socialistic government policy has cost the lives of millions under such people as Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and others.

We continue to hear about "job creation" by the federal government from every administration. The concept of "job creation by the federal government" really is a convenient socialistic fiction, a concept even Bush adopted. Apart from hiring soldiers, spies, and state functionaries, government doesn't produce jobs. However, government can inspire profound changes in the political economy that encourage private employers to hire or fire people, but only if it does not try to take control over those private sector employers and their companies.

History teaches us that politicians, regardless of what country they live in, cannot be trusted with a monopoly of power. This gives them, special interest groups and lobbyists too much power over the lives of average citizens of that country, state or city. Noted by most scholars is the large number of people promoting socialism for America who have never lived under a socialist government; contrast that to the even larger number of people who have lived under socialism and who vehemently reject that system. Lessons to be learned I am sure.

On one of the cable networks after the November 2008 elections, a self-described socialist was asked about the failure of socialism around the world in many countries and why it should be tried here. He responded that socialism is the voice of the people and that the only reason it has not worked in other countries is because those countries did not have the wealth, the types of intellectuals, professors and government leaders that we have in America, so we have all we need to get it right where others failed.

Unfortunately, since the election of President Obama, socialists have been emboldened and have stepped up their attacks and criticisms of American capitalism and the free markets. They have gone public with their rejection of entrepreneurial opportunities and individual rights. Yet according to numerous polls, the majority of Americans still think free market capitalism, even with all of its periodic flaws, occasional failures and inefficiencies, is much better than socialism. I suspect that the war between socialism and capitalism will indeed get even hotter in the years to come.

http://www.thedailyjournal.com/article/200...ION02/903060327

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Socialism USA: Part 1

By icommunist

There are so many accusations in regards to socialism lately that we feel the need to clear the air and present you with a multi-parted series on what the Communist Party of the United States believes - to quell the idea that somehow Barak Obama is a socialist. He is not - but we are...

We Communists believe that socialism is the very best replacement for a capitalist system that has served its purpose, but no longer meets the needs and requirements of the great majority of our people. -

We believe that socialism USA will be built according to the traditions, history, culture and conditions of the United States. Thus, it will be different from any other socialist society in the world. It will be uniquely American.

What will be the goals of our socialist society?:

1. A life free of exploitation, insecurity, poverty; an end to unemployment, hunger and homelessness.

2. An end to racism, national oppression, anti-Semitism, all forms of discrimination, prejudice and bigotry. An end to the unequal status of women.

3. Renewal and extension of democracy; an end to the rule of corporate America and private ownership of the wealth of our nation. Creation of a truly humane and rationally planned society that will stimulate the fullest flowering of the human personality, creativity and talent.

The advocates and ideologues of capitalism hold that such goals are utopian; that human beings are inherently selfish and evil. Others argue that these goals can be fully realized under capitalism.

We are confident, however, that such goals can be realized, but only through a socialist society.

Why Socialism?:

Since its inception capitalism has been fatally flawed. Its inherent laws - to maximize profit on the backs of the working class - give rise to the class struggle.

History is a continuous story of people rising up against those who exploit and oppress them, to demand what's theirs. Our own country's historic beginning was revolutionary. The ideals of justice and equality have inspired peoples for centuries.

Up until the time of Karl Marx, those that advocated socialism were "utopians", that is, motivated by ideals only. It was Marx and his longtime friend and collaborator, Frederick Engels, who uncovered the inner laws of capitalism, where profit comes from and how societies develop. They transformed wishful thinking for socialism into socialism with a scientific, materialist basis.

Communists say that capitalism won't be around forever. Just like previous societies weren't around forever either. Slavery gave rise to feudalism and feudalism to capitalism. So, too, capitalism gives rise to socialism...

... to be continued next Tuesday

http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/107831.html

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Social democracies are capitalist.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Social democracies are capitalist.

You could say, they are market driven, as opposed to command economies. My PoliSci Professor used the term "Market Socialism" to describe most of the pre-EU economies. But, he also defined the US economy as "Welfare State Capitalism". One of the basic differences he noted, was the lack of planning between government and industry in the United States, something that is taken for granted as the status quo, in most European countries.

[baron555 934]

Sheep love socialism.

[HAL 9000 96]

Sounds like what's could end up being necessary is a healthy blend of the two without any hysterical, Cold War hysterics. Then the rich will continue being rich and most people will just stfu.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Sounds like what's could end up being necessary is a healthy blend of the two without any hysterical, Cold War hysterics. Then the rich will continue being rich and most people will just stfu.

It is unlikely that the United States will ever return to "Laisez-Faire Capitalism". The excesses of the robber barons in the late 19th century put an end to that. The current direction is for more and more government control of industry. Maybe it is time we stop kidding ourselves, and finally move to a model where industry and government are no longer adversaries, but partners.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Is there anyone here for Socialism?

[S and S 12]

I don't like socialism in many ways. It gives the government too much power, yet I do have some socialistic ideas for health care. Too many people are suffering because they can't afford to go to the doctor. Only the very poor can get some of their medical needs covered by the government. One of the reasons health care costs so much is the amount of money it takes to get people through medical school. Doctors (unless they came from rich families) tend to finish school with well over 100K in college debt. I think it would be great if we could set up government ran hospitals throughout the country, maybe one or two per city depending on size, and employ them with people that the government paid for their college. It could be a grant for their education expenses with the stipulation that they must work in the government operated hospitals at a lower wage for a set amount of years. This could help the poorer college students that don't want to be saddled with high college debts. Then you offer these hospitals to people within certain income levels that can't afford private health insurance. This way you still have privately owned hospitals that care for those with insurance or who can afford it. Just an idea. I am no expert, but I think it could work.

[NickD 203]

Is there anyone here for Socialism?

I am if I can get lots of free stuff for doing nothing. But we already have socialism, paying for kids I never had the fun of making, extra money in my electric and gas bill for people that cannot afford it. Extra money for health insurance for those that don't pay, extra taxes for WICK, extra taxes for that idiot building inspector, extra taxes for police that run around and ticket everyone, and the list goes on and on. Never got a dime from the government, not even my VA benefits due to some phony fire. If I have to work my a$$ off so can everyone else.

Exactly what is socialism? And why is it considered new?

[S and S 12]

Is there anyone here for Socialism?

I am if I can get lots of free stuff for doing nothing. But we already have socialism, paying for kids I never had the fun of making, extra money in my electric and gas bill for people that cannot afford it. Extra money for health insurance for those that don't pay, extra taxes for WICK, extra taxes for that idiot building inspector, extra taxes for police that run around and ticket everyone, and the list goes on and on. Never got a dime from the government, not even my VA benefits due to some phony fire. If I have to work my a$ off so can everyone else.

Exactly what is socialism? And why is it considered new?

Good points, what about the million different taxes they add to our phone bills? I added up $20 one one phone bill alone which is the price of basic land line service.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I don't like socialism in many ways. It gives the government too much power, yet I do have some socialistic ideas for health care. Too many people are suffering because they can't afford to go to the doctor. Only the very poor can get some of their medical needs covered by the government. One of the reasons health care costs so much is the amount of money it takes to get people through medical school. Doctors (unless they came from rich families) tend to finish school with well over 100K in college debt. I think it would be great if we could set up government ran hospitals throughout the country, maybe one or two per city depending on size, and employ them with people that the government paid for their college. It could be a grant for their education expenses with the stipulation that they must work in the government operated hospitals at a lower wage for a set amount of years. This could help the poorer college students that don't want to be saddled with high college debts. Then you offer these hospitals to people within certain income levels that can't afford private health insurance. This way you still have privately owned hospitals that care for those with insurance or who can afford it. Just an idea. I am no expert, but I think it could work.

I agree that it would give them way too much power. Also could you imagine having every aspect of your life micro managed.

[S and S 12]

I don't like socialism in many ways. It gives the government too much power, yet I do have some socialistic ideas for health care. Too many people are suffering because they can't afford to go to the doctor. Only the very poor can get some of their medical needs covered by the government. One of the reasons health care costs so much is the amount of money it takes to get people through medical school. Doctors (unless they came from rich families) tend to finish school with well over 100K in college debt. I think it would be great if we could set up government ran hospitals throughout the country, maybe one or two per city depending on size, and employ them with people that the government paid for their college. It could be a grant for their education expenses with the stipulation that they must work in the government operated hospitals at a lower wage for a set amount of years. This could help the poorer college students that don't want to be saddled with high college debts. Then you offer these hospitals to people within certain income levels that can't afford private health insurance. This way you still have privately owned hospitals that care for those with insurance or who can afford it. Just an idea. I am no expert, but I think it could work.

I agree that it would give them way too much power. Also could you imagine having every aspect of your life micro managed.

Actually, I can, but that was because I used to be in the military. I hated asking for permission to even go visit my family on the weekend even though I wasn't working those days anyway.

[HAL 9000 96]

Sounds like what's could end up being necessary is a healthy blend of the two without any hysterical, Cold War hysterics. Then the rich will continue being rich and most people will just stfu.

It is unlikely that the United States will ever return to "Laisez-Faire Capitalism". The excesses of the robber barons in the late 19th century put an end to that. The current direction is for more and more government control of industry. Maybe it is time we stop kidding ourselves, and finally move to a model where industry and government are no longer adversaries, but partners.

A simple look at current times tells us that the old, solitary robber barons have been somewhat replaced by the eccentric board of directors at many institutions we all criticize yet some rush to defend vicariously by attacking Obama's fresh role in stabilizing the stock market.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Is there anyone here for Socialism?

I am if I can get lots of free stuff for doing nothing. But we already have socialism, paying for kids I never had the fun of making, extra money in my electric and gas bill for people that cannot afford it. Extra money for health insurance for those that don't pay, extra taxes for WICK, extra taxes for that idiot building inspector, extra taxes for police that run around and ticket everyone, and the list goes on and on. Never got a dime from the government, not even my VA benefits due to some phony fire. If I have to work my a$$ off so can everyone else.

Exactly what is socialism? And why is it considered new?

A collective ownership for the most part, or as some say the stepping stone to communism. Its a idea that through collective ownership(such as housing) no one will go with out. It may sound good but its not very realistic. Keep in mind too that there is different levels of socialism.

Edited March 7, 2009 by looking_up