Why do people keep throwing around socialist like it is a horrible word?

Question

it beats the hell out of neocon

suthrn...I agree

Hate to tell you guys, but neocon ain't working either

Answer 1

Those people are just antisocialists who prefer their societies unsocialized.

I am so tired of those antisocialists basically saying that it is the same as Communism, and that the Russian economic collapse proves their straw dog. This even as Yeltsin's Russia that was built on their theories was worse than the Communists, and the even more radical Libertarian economy of Iraq was worse yet.

The ACTUAL Socialist countries of Western Europe have done just fine, and in fact gotten better faster than the US in spite of the head start the US had of getting all the money from WW2 and not much of the devastation.

Socialism just means that all leadership is subject to accountability, and that the rules favor what is best for the majority, and punish fraud and exploitation.

Neocon and Russian Communist both abhor accountability, and believe in an elite that controls everyone else, though their propaganda declares otherwise. By cratering American Industry, because the could make more money looting it than running it, the Gang Of Pirates have done nearly as much damage to America as Russia. We will be generations repairing it if we manage ever to do so.

Answer 2

I have to second Washington Irving's comment.

Most "socialists" use the word "socialism" to mean some form of workers' control of the means of production. This usually includes democratic socialism (where the workers, i.e. everyone, control the state, and it regulates or runs the economy) and libertarian socialism (where the workers generally own their means of production, either through their union, or through community groups, or in a cooperative, or individually, and these exchange goods, either cooperatively or in a market). Of course many on each side dismiss the other side as utopian.

The Soviet model was democratic socialism minus the democracy - and, many would add, minus the socialism as a result.

Most critics of "socialism" use the word "socialism" to mean some form of state control of the means of production. In this sense, regulation, subsidies, mixed economies, etc. are "socialist." However, in this sense, labor unions, credit unions, communes, etc. wouldn't be "socialist," and state-funded highways, immigration restrictions, intellectual property, wars, etc. would be "socialist." Neocons who accuse anarchists of supporting state intervention are ... hypocrites and then some.

Answer 3

Because -to the neocons--that's all it is--a swear word.

I'm quite serious. If you look at how they sue the term "socialist" it is very apparent that most of them don't have the faintest idea of the meaning of the word. Nor a number of other terms they use--like "liberal," "patriotic," or , for that matter, "christian."

In each case, they use the terms--frequently, in a context that is clearly inappropriate and simply doesn't square with the definition of the word. I mentioned the latter two only to point out that this is equally true of terms they regard as positive--but they don't understand what they actually mean either.

Answer 4

Excellent synopsis 'Washington Irving,' I strongly agree....much like the economic model of capitalism is never challenged in public dialogue, the word socialism has been systematically programmed to invoke a series of rote reponses which prevent any intelligent examination of this philosophy...despite the fact that socialist structures are what make our society possible. It wouldn't be healthy for the corporate business world for people to understand a Socialist society is still a relatively 'new' idea, ineffectively implemented so far, and having nothing to do with the corrupt statist societies we have seen to date, like the USSR.

Answer 5

I think they are looking at how socialism is in other countries.
They fail to consider the strong work ethic in us Americans. We are the most productive place in the world. We were known as innovators. I don't know if that's true anymore. We are in serious danger of losing it because our science and math programs are pitiful. They have not kept up with the times. I have a lot of faith in our people to make socialism work here because it has become necessary to give people back a sense of stability and security that we desperately need. I believe our costs will decrease. We have incredibly inventive and smart people. We are not using them to capacity to date. We are being stupid with how things are structured. We can do so much better.

Answer 6

Socialism is an economic model -- it determines who owns property (mixed govt and private ownership) and it relates to the amount of control and regulation the govt can have over economic and commercial matters (high, but not total).

The word is thrown around mainly by people who think it has something to do with fascism (it doesn't) or communism (same direction, but not the same) or liberalism (directly opposed to socialism).

In other words, many people who use it don't really pay attention to what the word means -- they just use it because it has emotional connotations that make it seem bad.

Answer 7

Because of the success of the propaganda campaign started by President Wilson when he appointed the Creel Commission. Its intent was to turn the population in favor of entering WWI. Goebbels was an admirer of US propaganda and developed his own propaganda after the findings of the Creel Commission.
Well trained Americans go rabid when they hear the words communism, socialism, terrorism, etc. It is an effect that has much to do with Pavlov's conditioned dog and very little to do with actual knowledge regarding the meaning of this words (let alone the myriad of ideas behind those words).
Americans also go wild when their government is accused of harming innocents and brainwashing its population. It is an appropriate tactic on the part of the US gov. to condition its population into avoiding such topics.

As for whether socialism is an applicable theory of public administration, I am a supporter. We could debate this matter, as I am well informed on the subject of capitalism failures and socialisms many victories. I would just expect the US gov. to stop murdering socialists around the world if it intends to live in peace with its neighbors. As you know, socialism is quite popular.... and we are tired of being bullied by your goons.

edit: I have an experiment for you. Ask Americans whether they believe socialism works or not and why. Then write down how many answered with reflexive responses. A popular one is "socialism looks good on paper but...", another common response equals socialism to totalitarianism, yet another coined response talks about how socialism "kills motivation" and other such responses. I would write down the responses in order to compare the variation in the words. The sources of this indoctrination are generally the same for many people, so that you can group people by the similarity of their answers.

I have been doing this for years now and the responses generally showcase little variation. My belief is that the source of the indoctrination is a mix between corporate news, US commercial cinema (particularly Cold War era films) and a very poor History program in most schools and universities. You can nonetheless try changing your variables and consult people of different educational backgrounds, perhaps narrow down the source to private/public education or whatever you come up with.
It is not a difficult exercise and it is quite revealing of the level of indoctrination US people are exposed to. If you want a control group, travel outside of the US and repeat the test. Other peoples are indoctrinated to, but as you will see, it is not regarding the same things.

Answer 8

It's part of the simplistic drivel they hear from pundits like Rush Limbaugh. They say Democrat = Liberal = Socialist = Communist and in their minds all of those names are equally bad. They don't even realize that they're not all synonymous. It's all just propaganda -- a way of demonizing the opposition.

Wow, blueridgeliving, that quote, "I'd rather be a Fascist than a Socialist", gives me chills too. That's one of the most disturbing trends in our current political climate. There are a lot of people who think that being slightly to the left or even middle of the road is bad, but they're completely unable to recognize that going too far to the right is just as bad as or worse than going too far to the left.

[edit]
Prancinglion, regardless of what Hitler chose to call his party, he was not a socialist. He was right-wing all the way and the first people he rounded up were the communists and socialists. Have you forgotten that the first line of Martin Niemoller's famous "and then they came for me" essay is, "In Germany they came first for the Communists"? He saw them as the strongest threat to his authority. The only reason why he used "socialist" in his party name was to mislead his followers into believing he represented everyone's interests. There was a strong socialist party prior to his rise to power, but the Nazis eliminated all traces of socialism. Do you still think there's no such thing as too far to the right?

[edit 2]
By the way, just so no one will think I'm confused, I recognize that fascism isn't the exact opposite of socialism. The opposite of socialism is capitalism and the opposite of fascism is libertarianism. A totalitarian government can be either left-wing like the USSR or right-wing like Nazi Germany. It's also possible to be socialist and libertarian (I think someone mentioned Sweden as an example) and enforced capitalism is just as bad as enforced socialism. If you don't know what I mean by enforced capitalism, consider all of the tax cuts, subsidies, and government contracts granted to certain corporations and industries by the current administration (and the kickbacks in some cases) and ask yourself if you can truly call it a "free market". That sounds like corporatism to me (see the third link below) and that has often been an important element of fascist authoritarian governments. If you think socialism is always evil and going to the opposite extreme is always good, you haven't learned enough from history.

Answer 9

Conservatives view 'socialist' as an insult because they don't understand what socialism is.

They equate socialism to communism, and they equate communism to the USSR and Cold War (i.e. the first answerer). Then they say things like 'socialism never works!'.

In fact, Democratic Socialism works very well in a number of countries (Sweden, for example). Or they say 'socialized healthcare doesn't work', and ignore the fact that many European social health care systems are superior to the current US system.

Basically, using 'socialist' as an insult is a sign of ignorance.

Answer 10

Because many hard working people don’t think that they should have to pay for the lives of others. If everyone is going to get all the same things in life, why should I work hard, or at all? If I’m going to be taxed into the poor house to support services for the poor, why not just stop working and become the recipient of those services. People should have a reason to work hard and better themselves, and just giving them things actually discourages this. I’ve been down, and worked my butt off to get to where I have a good job with good benefits, and I can buy nice things for myself. If working hard would mean paying more taxes and making less so that those that don’t work can have the same things, what would be the point of me even trying? I don’t want to support those that won’t do for themselves. I don’t think that Social healthcare is a good idea. I don’t want programs supporting everyone. If someone is physically incapable of working, or has reached an age where they can’t anymore, then yes, those people should be supported. But those that can’t work because they just don’t want to try should really just be left to what they make of their own lives.