Let's Talk A Little Socialism

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
3,047
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
Words from the fingers of someone uniquely qualified to define such a topic. Ayn Rand lived under and escaped Soviet Rule.

"Socialism is the doctrine that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that his life and his work do not belong to him, but belong to society, that the only justification of his existence is his service to society, and that society may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.

The essential characteristic of socialism is the denial of individual property rights; under socialism, the right to property (which is the right of use and disposal) is vested in “society as a whole,” i.e., in the collective, with production and distribution controlled by the state, i.e., by the government.
Socialism may be established by force, as in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics — or by vote, as in Nazi (National Socialist) Germany. The degree of socialization may be total, as in Russia — or partial, as in England. Theoretically, the differences are superficial; practically, they are only a matter of time. The basic principle, in all cases, is the same.
The alleged goals of socialism were: the abolition of poverty, the achievement of general prosperity, progress, peace and human brotherhood. The results have been a terrifying failure — terrifying, that is, if one’s motive is men’s welfare.
Instead of prosperity, socialism has brought economic paralysis and/or collapse to every country that tried it. The degree of socialization has been the degree of disaster. The consequences have varied accordingly.


There is no difference between the principles, policies and practical results of socialism — and those of any historical or prehistorical tyranny. Socialism is merely democratic absolute monarchy — that is, a system of absolutism without a fixed head, open to seizure of power by all corners, by any ruthless climber, opportunist, adventurer, demagogue or thug.
When you consider socialism, do not fool yourself about its nature. Remember that there is no such dichotomy as “human rights” versus “property rights.” No human rights can exist without property rights. Since material goods are produced by the mind and effort of individual men, and are needed to sustain their lives, if the producer does not own the result of his effort, he does not own his life. To deny property rights means to turn men into property owned by the state. Whoever claims the “right” to “redistribute” the wealth produced by others is claiming the “right” to treat human beings as chattel.

When one observes the nightmare of the desperate efforts made by hundreds of thousands of people struggling to escape from the socialized countries of Europe, to escape over barbed-wire fences, under machine-gun fire — one can no longer believe that socialism, in any of its forms, is motivated by benevolence and by the desire to achieve men’s welfare.

No man of authentic benevolence could evade or ignore so great a horror on so vast a scale.
Socialism is not a movement of the people. It is a movement of the intellectuals, originated, led and controlled by the intellectuals, carried by them out of their stuffy ivory towers into those bloody fields of practice where they unite with their allies and executors: the thugs."
 

Grandmaster B

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
403
Points
83
Location
The Happy
Pure ideology will always fail. Pure socialism, pure capitalism.

America, the UK, Europe, Japan, on and on, the world has proven that the best form of economy is some kind of mix.
 
OP
johnlocke

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
3,047
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
Pure ideology will always fail. Pure socialism, pure capitalism.

America, the UK, Europe, Japan, on and on, the world has proven that the best form of economy is some kind of mix.

That is simply not true in any way shape or form.
 
OP
johnlocke

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
3,047
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
Name one example of pure capitalism that has survived through time.

There has never been a truly laissez-fair capitalist system ever implemented in any country in the history of the world. It has always been ether control or lip-service to property rights while violating them with unjust regulations.

The closest any country ever came to free unregulated capitalism was the US and dragged a good deal of the world out of abject poverty,

The closer you get to freedom the greater the world.
 
Last edited:

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,695
Reaction score
1,354
Points
113
Location
Michigan
Name one example of pure capitalism that has survived through time.

There aren't any that are pure capitalism. Things like common defense and infrastructure require some taxation. This is well know and is outlined in the Preamble.

Things go sideways FAST when socialism is deployed much beyond those.

So the answer to your question is more complicated and you know that. Capitalism BASED countries do more to promote the welfare and advancement of teh people than any other.

That said, Socialism based countries fail every single time. And they fail spectacularly with much death and usually starvation.

But you think you can do it better this time. We know you think that.

You are so smart!
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,695
Reaction score
1,354
Points
113
Location
Michigan
There has never been a truly laissez-fair capitalist system ever implemented in any country in the history of the world. It has always been ether control or lip-service to property rights while violating them with unjust regulations.

The closest any country ever came to free unregulated capitalism was the US and dragged a good deal of the world out of abject poverty,

The closer you get to freedom the greater the world
Outstanding post.
 

Grandmaster B

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
403
Points
83
Location
The Happy
America was on the verge of complete collapse at the turn of the 20th century. Five families in the U.S. owned absolutely everything.

Conversely, the strongest America has been is in the decades following WWII, when top tax rates reached 93%, and we instilled a social safety net.

Trust, we do not want to try your little Ayn Rand social experiment. We've seen the failures of trickle down for 40 years.
 
OP
johnlocke

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
3,047
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
I live in a social democracy. It has its falws, but aint that bad.

I have friends in Scandanavia that wouldn't agree with you. However Scandanavian countries tend to have had freer markets than the US and other things for a good while. I have friends and family in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark.

This a good article from Cato about the thought that some Scandanavian countries are Socilalsit. It focuses a lot on Sweden and how it's economically freer than the US in several ways.


I do know this about Norway back in the '80s anyway, I had family there that owned a store and would close and take half the year off to go sailing cuz if they continued to work the rest of the year it would have all gone to taxes. I don't think it's like that now, however.

I also have a dear friend and member of this board in Denmark (damn Colts fan tho :) ) While she likes the system but she works almost 80 hours a week cause their tax level is something like 63 percent in total. Her liking of it is social services, unfortunately, you have to run outta money at some point. Socialism is a parasitical system that creates nothing and rests on the back of Capitalism at every turn for as much as it's allowed to work.
 
Last edited:

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,703
Reaction score
1,107
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth
There has never been a truly laissez-fair capitalist system ever implemented in any country in the history of the world. It has always been ether control or lip-service to property rights while violating them with unjust regulations.

The closest any country ever came to free unregulated capitalism was the US and dragged a good deal of the world out of abject poverty,

The closer you get to freedom the greater the world.
I must say, that sure sounds like a socialist explaining Venezuela.
 
OP
johnlocke

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
3,047
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
I must say, that sure sounds like a socialist explaining Venezuela.

Except the principles are completely opposite.

And my last sentence about the closer we get to freedom the greater the world stands on its own.
 
Last edited:

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,703
Reaction score
1,107
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth
Except the principles are completely opposite.
Maybe, but I think that a hybrid system, which is what the constitution provides for, is the way to go. I tend to heavily lean towards capitalism, but there is a reason promote the general welfare is in the Preamble. There are people who want to just focus on those four words, and there are those who want to focus on all but those four words. There are many more types for sure, like the spread "freedom" crowd, but I think they are more corporatist types who could care what type of system we are in as long as they can kill people.
 
OP
johnlocke

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
3,047
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH
Maybe, but I think that a hybrid system, which is what the constitution provides for, is the way to go. I tend to heavily lean towards capitalism, but there is a reason promote the general welfare is in the Preamble. There are people who want to just focus on those four words, and there are those who want to focus on all but those four words. There are many more types for sure, like the spread "freedom" crowd, but I think they are more corporatist types who could care what type of system we are in as long as they can kill people.

I personally think the general welfare part is the downfall of the republic.
 

foobahl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
3,703
Reaction score
1,107
Points
113
Location
the only Henniker on earth
Shared by a friend of mine today: An Nhan loosely translates to benefactor.

Nguyễn Dũng
Đáng Suy Ngẫm

December 11 at 3:00 AM ·
SUY VÀ NGẪM
Khi con chuột ở trong một cái hũ toàn là gạo. Nó cảm thấy cuộc sống thật an nhàn và thế là nó chỉ ở yên đấy rồi hưởng thụ.
Mãi cho đến một ngày, hũ cạn hết gạo. Lúc này nó mới phát hiện ra nó đang ở sâu dưới đáy hũ và không thể nào ra ngoài được nữa. Nó đành lực bất tòng tâm nhìn ra bên ngoài và khóc.
Bạn nên ghi nhớ: Ở trong độ tuổi có thể chịu đựng được thử thách của cuộc sống đừng lựa chọn "An Nhàn".
"TUỘT DỐC THÌ DỄ, MÀ LEO DỐC THÌ KHÓ “
sưu tầm
GUYS AND NUMBER
When the mouse is in a jar full of rice. It feels life is so peaceful and so it just stays there and enjoys.
Until one day, the jar ran out of rice. At this time he found out he was deep in the bottom of the jar and couldn't go out anymore. It's powerless to look outside and cry.
You should remember: In the age of being able to endure the challenges of life, do not choose ′′ An Nhan ".
 
Top