What an excellent question! If anyone has called you a Socialist Bimbo for asking this question, please ignore them. Chances are that they probably don’t have a good understanding of the concept anyway, and they are only calling you names because they’ve heard that “Socialism/Communism is bad”. I doubt that they could give you a satisfactory explanantion. It speaks volumes about your character that you’re actually trying to learn something. We really need to see more questions like this on Answers.com.
Socialism is a particular type of socio-economic doctrine which advocates social control over the distribution of wealth and property. Basically, rather than having private ownership of the means of production, there is collective, social control.
This stands in stark contrast to Capitalism. Capitalism is a socio-economic doctrine which advocates private ownership of property and over the means of production. You can think of these different doctrines as being on a continuum with zero social control of property on the far left and absolute social control on the far right.
On the far left, you would have Capitalism, and next you would find “Mixed economies”. The United States is actually not a Capitalist country anymore, we are really a mixed economy where there is some social control of propery. Think of things like public parks, which are collectively owned. As you continue to the right, you will find Socialism, and finally, you will find Communism where the “State” owns everything. There is absolutely zero private property in a Communist economy.
So that’s the basic breakdown, and now I will quickly explain the problems with “State” ownership of property. Imagine for a moment that you live in a Communist country. The government owns everything including property and businesses. You wake up in the morning and go to work, just like you might here in the U.S., but there is one key difference. In a Communist system, the government owns everything; they get your paycheck at the end of the week. Even if you are the hardest worker in the entire country, they take your whole paycheck. They also collect everyone else’s paychecks throughout the entire country and then they decide the best way to spend “their” money.
More than likely they will give you some of it back. They will give you enough for food and water, and perhaps even some for medicine if you need it (if there is any money left). That might not sound too bad to you. Everyone has at least the bare neccesities. But there are some serious problems with the system. Imagine that one of your coworkers is extremely lazy. He reports to work just like you, but he doesn’t lift a finger. Actually, imagine that he doesn’t even show up at work; he just sleeps in. At the end of the week, he’ll get exactly the same amount of money that you will. Why should you keep working?
You probably think that it isn’t fair for him to get paid the same amount when he isn’t doing anything, so the next day when you go in to work you don’t do anything either. Or perhaps you just sleep in too. Don’t worry though, at the end of the week, you’ll still get paid. Whether you work or not, you get paid the same amount. Do you see how this causes a problem? It removes all of the incentive for people to work, and pretty soon everyone is either not working or doing a halfhearted job. It turns out that Communist countries are extremly poor for this reason.
If instead, you don’t pay people who don’t come to work they’ll learn that they need to work if they expect money. Also, when you allow people to be paid more for working harder, you give them an incentive to put in extra effort. This is what capitalism is based on.
There are a range of Socialist movements, each with their own positions on how much social ownership the governement should have. Some Socialists are indistinguishable from Communists, while others lean closer to a “Mixed Economy”. So you can’t just dump all Socialists into one cateragory, but in genral, Socialism faces the same problems that Communism does.
If you’re really intersested in this topic, I highly recommend that you take an Economics course. Once again, great question!
2006-06-11 06:34:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by codemap 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
People believe that a fully socialist governments, such as China or the former USSR are bad because the government usually holds all the power. What happens is that the government and the people who work for the government are in control, and they control everything, medicine, tv, what people read and eat.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The people are highly censored, under strict control, highly taxed (if they can find work at all) which results in very high poverty and unemployment rates. The only people who seem to have any quality of life in the worst socialist governments are those who work for the government whilst the people starve and die from easily curable illnesses because government controls their medical industry, which results in it being good for nothing. The worst socialist governments say they are 'of the people' or 'for the people' or 'people's party' when really it's just a few highly corrupts leaders lining their pockets. What also usually happens in these extreme examples is that there are frequent social uprisings for obvious reasons. The jail system becomes packed with people who's only crime was speaking out against the government, starting a union, practicing a religion other than a state mandated one if one at all, etc. Torture is also common in prison systems such as these. It is of utmost importance to control and contain the people so they won't revolt being as they are usually miserable about something.
However there are a few moderately social governments that walk a thin line between freedom of the individual, trade and industry and social benefits which are included in the people's taxes. It results many times in very high taxing, but like I said, it's a thin line. THese countries will offer for the citizens free health care, free education, and other various different benefits depending on the country. THings that americans are crying for because we are individually going into financial destitution trying to pay for.
2006-06-11 06:36:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Instead of Market determine the price of good and services, the State control the economy. It is base on the principle set by Karl Marx. Canada is a capitalist country, only socialist in name. Socialist government did not work. Look at the different between East and West Germany before they reunited. Look at North and South Korea, same people, but different outcome. Even China and Russia are turning to the wave of capitalism, even though they are still socialist in name.
2006-06-11 07:39:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by sharpshooter 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is a redistribution of private property and business by those who did not earn them according to their own system of what is 'better' which depends on their own lack of corruption and beneficence. Power corrupts. Few countries stick to Utopian ideals. Basically, it is the government who would decide who get preferences, but the preferences would still be there, if you look at history.
Slowly adopting certain policies some deem socialist, like national health care, is a different thing. I don't agree that Canada is socialist, however, my grandfather would certainly have disagreed.
In any event, history has not created one example of socialism that worked as a permanent lifestyle, and getting to socialism/communism requires huge dislocations (hence the phrase "Come, the revolution!"). Because of that people have become pretty jaded with true socialism or communism unless they stand to benefit hugely and think they will be at the top of the pile in a new system, determining preferences for others.
China made the best job of it if you look at where they were in 1950 and where they are now, but look at the lifestyle they had to adopt to get there. By law they could only have one child, no religion, no freedom of speech as we know it, and families were communally raised. A lot of this is less true now, but China is moving towards capitalism now. It hasn't given freedom back to its citizens yet, however.
2006-06-11 06:52:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by DAR 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
In every incarnation from the National Socialists (NAZI party in Germany) to the USSR and China millions are slaughtered. The argument can be made that Stalin was a bigger monster than Hitler just by the numbers he had killed or starved.
Socialism doesn't provide any incentive for people to work. Where as a free market provides competition and rewards for those who work harder or smarter
Socialism denies human nature. It denies that man is basically selfish and only cares about taking care of what is his. Which goes back to the previous point.
Socialism doesn't work without a huge influx of capital. Even Marx and Ingles had to leach off of Ingles dad to survive.
Market economy where the populace gets to keep most of their money actually increases the tax revenue. Something that JFK espoused and something that has been proven every time we have cut taxes.
The best way to know what a marxist is.. is simply read the Communist Manifesto by Marx. Every time I've read it I swear that marx had to be smoking pot, because there are several times he talks in circles and ignores the facts about human nature that history has bared out.
2006-06-11 19:31:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by .45 Peacemaker 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Socialist goverment and a true communist goverment are very different but in US both are referred to as same. A socialist goverment allows capitalism in some fields but will control the essential areas by itself. True communism does not allow capitalism and all services are handled by goverment companies. You will be seeing a goverment run basic food distributions system, goverment run companies in many essential areas. The diffulty is due to this, goverment monopolies exist in those fields. Most of these become inefficent and corruption prone in the long run. Hence instead of giving a good essential service, the goverment run organizations give you more difficulties. Here in US you will see that the insurance companies charging a lot and are considered evil. But in socialist countries you will see goverment run insurance that take a long time to get your claims paid.
Some info:
http://www.onelife.com/social/princ.html
2006-06-11 06:16:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Little Bhishma 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Socialism is basically what Russia had during the Cold War. Here is your answer though. A political theory or system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles
2006-06-11 06:04:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by se_roddy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
socialist is one step from communism. no matter how hard you work, everyone gets the same. if america becomes socialist, in a month, we'll be JUST LIKE MEXICO, a craphole.
2006-06-12 11:15:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by NONAME 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Socialism is taking from those who work and giving to those who do not work. It is totally immoral. It's a welfare state like the U.S.
2006-06-11 13:01:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Yahoo Sux 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Canada is socialist. I love it.
2006-06-11 06:05:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by tonyintoronto@rogers.com 4
·
1⤊
0⤋