Isnt it obvious that the 'every man for himself' thinking is leading to the destruction of everything?
2006-12-27 19:22:48 · 21 answers · asked by paradox is interesting 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
A lot of the responses I read were criticisms of communism, which should not be confused with socialism. I think if we had a healthy democracy we would have a mixed economy with a significant degree of socialism. In a society where money rules, the forces of government and power are in the hands of a very small portion of the population, and it is in the interest of this small elite to maintain the plutocracy, the system that caters to them. This is done by keeping the population politically and socially illiterate and propagating disinformation. Socialism caters to the well-being of the vast majority of people. In socialism there is a strong public sector where the benefits of a significant resources accrue to the people in general instead of being used to provide profits for a few. Don't take my words for it...study and reflect on these topics.
2006-12-27 21:12:10 · answer #1 · answered by peace m 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Socialism stifles the individualism of people. It takes away from our freedom, our drive and ambition to better ourselves. It says that society knows what is best for us. This is seldom true. It encourages laziness. The list goes on. I'm not seeing "the destruction of everything". I see war. War has been around since the dawn of man. I see people working, going to school, falling in love, being born and dieing. I see the sun come up in the morning and the moon at night. I see children playing and laughing. I see pain and suffering, hunger and death. All of these things have been around and will always be around as long as there are people to witness them. The difference between socialism and capitalism is I can decide more what to do with the time and money and choices that are inherently mine.
2006-12-27 19:31:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
The fact is many Americans confuse Socialism with communism,or they think they are similar..this is due that we learn very little about Socialism..! Although I am not an Anti socialist..I'M not sure if its workable..I say this because if you take a look at western Europe,where people have a much better understanding of Socialism ,where it been applied often leads to high unemployment rate and higher taxes..I personally prefer Social Democracy !
2006-12-27 20:09:33 · answer #3 · answered by dadacoolone 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No it is not obvious at all. What is destructive is losing individual choice to government bureaucracy. That is the definition of "Big Brother", having a bureaucrat make life decisions for you.
"Every man for himself" is the way we are born and the way we die. It does not preclude caring for others. There would be no charity if there were no people with enough to be able to give.
Doing anything by government is the most wasteful and inefficient way to get it done. I am not saying that every government worker is lazy or anything like that. It just is inherent in government to get dragged down, move slowly and hemorage tax dollars.
2006-12-27 19:32:48 · answer #4 · answered by Susan M 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I will answer the question. The answer is not what you or people want to hear.Almost all the little girls and boys want to grow up to be rich.We all know we can not all be rich.In the process people are going to be hurt.Your problem is you are confusing many not all Americans with people who care.Greed can be good.but can also lead to the destruction of everything.To the right wing nut jobs,we can have rich people and help the needy.
2006-12-27 19:51:03 · answer #5 · answered by radio309 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Name one country with a great economy, and good standard of living for the average person, with a socialist style government. And exactly what is being destroyed? Americans spend more money on Breast implants than some do on medicine. Why because we can and we can still buy the medicine.
2006-12-27 19:30:11 · answer #6 · answered by mark g 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because why should one go to school and work harder than another but be given the same benefits. Why become a doctor and spend 25 years in school with countless hours of work and be equal to a laborer. Capitalism says you get what you put into life. I dont like paying 35 to 40 percent in taxes now, in a socialist country you have to pay even more taxes. Correct?
2006-12-27 19:29:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
The polarity in those matters will continually devolve to extremism, except everybody needs to make the attempt to describe the obstacles of their place. "some" regulations might desire to be in place. no longer because of the fact the Universe needs them, yet because of the fact with out them, extremes are reached. as an occasion, no clean water act became required ...until an extreme became reached. Lake Erie catching on hearth became an extreme. Lakes are actually not meant to burn! Likewise, dumping dioxins and persons-killing chemical compounds at as quickly as into the water furnish is a 'undesirable' subject. This became completed, because of the fact there have been no regulations to tension some companies into doing what became 'suitable'. companies do in comparison to spending money on regulations, it cuts into their earnings. comprehensible. in spite of the undeniable fact that, doing what's 'suitable' ought to additionally be a corporation's objective. there are various documented situations of this no longer happening. regulations pop up around those situations. Are some regulations extremes with the aid of themselves? sure! all and sundry is human beings, and regulators can replace into zealots. the only answer there could be to place in writing regulations on the regulators? you will see the place that mess leads, from a million,000 miles away! we can not part faraway from a society. (Or, in case you will a social gadget.) we don't might desire to embody 'socialism' the two. I do think of that extremism on those matters will merely muddy the waters on how perfect to manage starting to be extra interdependent, on an identical time as nevertheless keeping our individuality. perfect needs
2016-11-24 19:30:18 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not obvious at all, my friend. It is the striving to better your own situation that drives people to succeed, create, and grow. Socialism stagnates the society in which it exists. People are inherently lazy and if they have no external impetus to put forth effort...they don't.
2006-12-28 01:27:08 · answer #9 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Socialism may work for beehives and anthills but it doesn't work for humans. It stifles creativity. Even the Chinese are moving towards the center. Cuba will too as soon as the old Dictator croaks.
2006-12-27 22:56:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋