Quote:
Originally Posted by Respenus
While I unfortunately do not have the time to go into a long theoretical discussion, I would only like to point one thing out. Do not mistake attempts by governments for what the idea(ls) calls for.
@diluvian, your example of a school applying the supposed ideas of socialism in the test exams runs against its very logic. The idea here is to allow everyone to achieve by their own merit the advancement in life, not to blindly redistribute in the name of an equal society. Yes, in order to achieve an even starting field, resources have to be distributed, but not in this sense. Marx's idea was: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Now while this can be interpreted in many different, especially negative ways, let us, for the sake of argument accept this statement as something meant for the common good of ALL human beings, regardless of other factors.
So to recap, there is a difference between implementation, policy preposition by different groups and the ideas behind it all. Oh and welfare policies in a strictly capitalist system are not socialism. Welfare state=/social democracy=/socialism.
|
The only reason i gave my example is because someone wondered what i thought socialism meant, My example shows mainly the cons, how the individual is not thought of, it is about equality of the collective - The consequences are less incentive to work [which is debated the very reason communism has failed in every country its been adopted in so far], less competition, the quality of life is lowered to a manageable level , bigger government, and more taxes- much like any modern military with recruits, you strengthen the weak, and weaken the strong, put everyone on the same playing field, you unify them, solidarity
It is a general sense of socialism, the example highlights the cons of socialism while pointing out the main goal of socialism, which is social equality - i dont mention the politics of instating socialist programs, or anything of that nature, i leave that to the socialist schools found around the world, those are their semantics that are highly debated, but i'll pass
"
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." I can somewhat agree with this - As I said i support some of our socialist
qualities. [i admit calling them socialist programs is a little strong, as though i was declaring them so, lol, but ours dont follow a completely socialist model- so i'll adopt the word qualities instead]
alot of government programs can be and in some cases do contain characteristics of other forms of economy - socialism and capitalism cannot coexist as they are, sometimes compromises are made from each and thrown together, the result is a mixed economy, some economies are more structured around capitalism, and others socialism - and because of this i made sure to mention we are a mixed economy, as thats the technical name for it, both socialist and social democrats support mixed economies...which speaking of, from a marxist perspective this would be an evolutionary stage between capitalism and socialism, as governments are said to progress through them until communism [but that has failed in every attempt so far]
im no marxist, never studied it too in depth, thats just a wild guess
With that said our welfare program is lacking in only one thing to fit the literal modern definition of socialism - it does not completely control our production [our jobs] though it does regulate plenty of sectors, it does not own us -- but in our model of welfare, state government does administrate the production of the collective[in this case our taxes] and handles the distribution of said taxes - but its goal is entirely socialist, being social equality
I certainly wouldn't call our welfare program a capitalist trait, as its more akin to socialism than capitalism - but it cant truly be either one of the two, which ties back to me mentioning mixed economy
As I stated, I agree with the idea of social equality - I'm all for SSI helping the elderly and disabled, prevent them from demographically having large gaps in quality of life compared to other social groups - but alot of the welfare programs here are being overly abused, and at the expense of the individual, which is what my example of tests in school points out
We don't have a big enough 'social safety net' yet to be considered a welfare state, but i've already got my stomach full with what we do have. I'm sure alot of what i had to say is redundant info for you, but im just explaining my thought process - and im done rambling