Give socialism a chance?

Question

The very definition of socialism is simplified to "public ownership of the means of production." When a person thinks of that, and I mean socialism in its true form, rather than its namesake Soviet form, doesn't it just sound like a superior system destined for the future? Looking at history, one can see that feudalism developed out of previous/more primitive social-political systems. After feudalism came capitalism, which emphasizes individual rights. Today crude individualism seems to be the one flaw in our society, and this capitalism owes its part in creating the underground market, as an alternate source of revenue for people left out of the mainstream market. Socialism on the other hand emphasizes both poltical and social rights, to a much greater extent than capitalism ever has. So does anyone believe that capitalism will evolve just as feudalism did? I do, even if it takes years

Answer 1

Capitalism revels in its failures as the pinnacle of its success.

You're not going to find high-quality public discourse on Yahoo! Answers. No one here seems able to disconnect the idea of socialism from the idea of statism.

You stated clearly that the goal of socialism is the public ownership of the means of production, but when the people here equate socialism with supreme statism, (which is false) then obviously that goal is contradicted.

Only the intellectually honest among us may see that socialism requires workers' self-manangement, and the role of the state should only be to facilitate this, which contradicts the interests of the state in the first place. This is where we get the idea of the "withering away of the state."

Stalinist Russia, I believe therefore, should be understood as socialism hijacked.

Capitalism will evolve, as Western capitalism survives on the cheap and exploited labor of the third world for its material goods and capital. Just like the workers of the West wouldn't stand for poor labor practices forever, neither will they. That will change the economic landscape of the world forever.

Answer 2

The lure of socialism, in theory, is very great. And, unfortunately, some aspects of it are necessary even in a capitalistic society. The government must, in some cases, protect the public from price gouging, monopolies in general and the exploitation of the workers. However, in a pure socialist system, production goes down. The best example of this that I can think of was in the old Soviet Union. 10% of the farms were privately owned and the other 90% were government owned. The 10% of the privately owned farms produced over 30% of the total agriculture output. The reason is simple - I'm not going to bust my butt 10 hours a day to feed my lazy neighbors if I don't own the farm and reap the benefits from from my labor.
I'm sure our economic system will continue to evolve with a mixture of different systems - but I'm equally sure that private ownership of the means of production will not be eliminated if the system is to continue to prosper - and, let's face it, under this system in a little over 200 years the United States has become arguable the greatest nation on earth.

Answer 3

I sure hope that capitalism evolves into something better than its current manisfestation:

The fear that Socialism will allow someone else to determine what people do, and how much they can make, and more importantly, how much of it we can keep seem pretty ironic when the current controllers of the world's capital and controllers of the workers' toil do precisely that, in a manner that can only be described as being a little inequitable.

The claim that capitalism is good, because it prevents a government from coercing its people, hasn't prevented liberties being taken away from the people within the capitalist nations. Indeed a worker is denied the true value of his labour by being co-erced to share it with his master. People under capitalism throughout the world are working to support not just themselves in their subsistence, lower or middleclass lifestyles, but are co-erced into supporting the few in their extremely rich lifestyles.

Do I believe that capitalism will evolve into a fairer system? I would like to believe it. The morality of living off the fruits of one's own labour is enshrined in Genesis: 'In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread,"

...whilst community sharing is also enshrined:
Proverbs 1:14 (New King James Version)
"Cast in your lot among us, Let us all have one purse.”

and of Capitalism?...
Proverbs 1:19 So are the ways of everyone who is greedy for gain; It takes away the life of its owners.

For as long as we have capitalists within the religious nations there may be hope, but don't hold your breath, since history shows that some of the most powerful capitalist nations also purport to have Christian or Judaic values, yet it is these very nations where the wealthy live off enslavement and the stolen labour of the workers. It is interesting to note however that Islamic texts actively promote capitalism, it accepts that there will be rich and poor people, and it confirms the disparity by actively supporting the rights to private property and inheritance. However it repeatedly warns the wealthy to care for the deprived. Something which seems lacking today within the Christian nations.

Answer 4

The thought that there will be a system that has fairness for all people is ridiculous. No matter what you name the political or economic system, you still have to deal with people who want to control others. I see no advantage or creativity generated in a system that says you must share all that you earn with using your innovative skills or the labor of your hands, with those who do neither of those. No such system of fairness exists or will ever exist. Impossible. History proves that.

The hope is that those who are well off would be generous with what they have. Some are and some aren't. Making sure the rich or powerful do not have the means to control others is also important.

Answer 5

You must be very young, socialism is very idealistic it looks great and sounds great on paper, but in reallity it becomes a society where the lazy want financial equality with the hard worker.Well it is not difficult to see the flaw in that scenario. It was tried in Russia for 70 years and in China for 50 years, and in Israel (Kibbutz) it didn't work for any of them, and it certainly won't work here. So get off your duff and work, and you will be rewarded accordingly.

Answer 6

No, most of the republicans who helped to make the U.S. a socialist united states below Pres. Bush Jr.'s bailouts won't in any respect settle for the fact approximately it. The U.S. became a democratic republic for 224 years till now Pres. Bush Jr. turn it right into a socialist united states. He additionally took a record funds surplus and became it into record deficits. the two area of his deficit chuffed words would be paid by utilising 1000's of generations of U.S. tax Payers. The republicans/conservatives/fox information threw the substitute tea social gathering protesting this deficit attempting to blame Pres. Obama for their mess. They never had one for "THE DICTATOR OF DEFICITS : DUBYA". After he did say proceed to exist t.v. "that his existence could be less complicated as a dictator."

Answer 7

You are so wrong on so many levels in that statement that I don't know where to begin to answer.
To start, capitalism is the private control of wealth. It is the only economic system that insures a government cannot coerce its people. Capitalism is not an extension of feudalism. It is the total opposite.
Socialism is an extension of feudalism. It evolved from a totalitarian state, not a democratic state. The ownership of wealth by the state insures that the state can coerce its people. There is no freedom under socialism.
Let me add one more thing. Socialism is likened to piracy. It is taking wealth from those who earned it and distributing it among those who have not. Why would you want to reward non-achievers with the wealth of achievers?

Answer 8

Why should we give it a chance,. The Soviet Union did for 40 years before they collapsed under it.

Answer 9

Phil nailed it. Socialism and its corresponding government control is a return to feudalism.

Individualism is what made America great.

Answer 10

Because the underlying basis of socialism is that humans are altruistic. We're not, so it won't work.