Does socialism work?

[T.s.e]

I have the perfect solution for all these problems: Remove money, and switch to a resource based economy. I seriously don't understand how people can even compare the welfare and life of people and the entire planet to some worthless pieces of paper.

 

[Samael88]

Samael88: That's bullshit and you know it, there was a financial crisis the world over and you don't even notice it in Sweden! You can't say you do. They are managing everything great. And before, they reduced unemployment with ~75%.

I don't care about any damn statistics, have you been to the "arbetsförmedling" in a while? What those moderates did is this:
They took away the free healthcare, which I needed because I get sick a lot due to my kidneys.
And they changed a lot of rules regarding the "arbetsförmedling" that screws up my situation as unemployed even more.

And don't even mention the damn financial crisis, that is just a damn excuse that the people who don't know the situation uses. There are records going many years back and there is a pattern that repeats itself everytime the moderates comes to power: Moderates throws sweden down the drain just for the socialdemocrates to put it back together again. Go to the library and look it up before you say that I am wrong.

Sweden is in the need of changes, that is why I say that the "SverigeDemokraterna" must get at least 1-2 mandates next election, if they get to many we are screwed, if they get none we are screwed, and Mona needs to step down and let someone better handle the regim if the SocialDemocrates get the lead.

Sorry for going a bit of topic there, even tho it has with socialism to do.
And I mean not to be harsh on you Zackyath, but I think that you should actually go out into society and take a good look around before you say something like that.

 

[Zakyath]

I don't care about any damn statistics, have you been to the "arbetsförmedling" in a while? What those moderates did is this:
They took away the free healthcare, which I needed because I get sick a lot due to my kidneys.
And they changed a lot of rules regarding the "arbetsförmedling" that screws up my situation as unemployed even more.

And don't even mention the damn financial crisis, that is just a damn excuse that the people who don't know the situation uses. There are records going many years back and there is a pattern that repeats itself everytime the moderates comes to power: Moderates throws sweden down the drain just for the socialdemocrates to put it back together again. Go to the library and look it up before you say that I am wrong.

Now, I think you've misunderstood some things.

About the healthcare. We pay a very very very very small amount of money for our healthcare. It's only so that every idiot with an headache won't go to the doctor; the sum you pay is mostly symbolic and to prevent this.

Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it doesn't work. Even if you don't care about statistics, it's a fact that their politics did give more people jobs.

And yeah, there was financial issues the world over the last the M got the power too. You make it sound like it's them who are the reason to crisis all over the world. It's not. If I go out at two different occasions and it starts raining both times, it doesn't mean I summon the rain. Same thing with M and global economic difficulties.

I'm not going to discuss Sweden's most popular racist party SD...

Anyway, you're right when you're saying we're getting off topic, so we should stop this.

 

[Cornface]

Sweden is in the need of changes, that is why I say that the "SverigeDemokraterna" must get at least 1-2 mandates next election, if they get to many we are screwed, if they get none we are screwed,

Err, why the hell would Sverige Demokraterna make it any better? All they want is to stop, or at least reduce the immigration.

 

[Samael88]

Err, why the hell would Sverige Demokraterna make it any better? All they want is to stop, or at least reduce the immigration.

Read my post again dude.

But back to topic:
I don't think that any -ism is working for everyone. No matter what box we use there will always be people that want to get out of it

And since socialism is kind of a ancestor of nazism or at least a cornerstone in it's fundament, then the question awakes "If that is the evil way of it, then what is the good way?"

I know that I am generalizing now, but there is a point in what I am saying

 

[TheDamien]

And since socialism is kind of a ancestor of nazism or at least a cornerstone in it's fundament, then the question awakes "If that is the evil way of it, then what is the good way?"

The Nazis may have called themselves "National Socialists" but there was very little socialism in their politics or ideology and they were decidedly hostile to contemporary socialist thought.

 

[Azlier]

It's like how the Soviet Union wasn't really Communist.

 

[ElderKingpin]

well. I was taught that Communism was rule by an elite few, so. see if that applies to something like Socialism.

 

[phyrex1an]

I was taught that Communism was rule by an elite few

Your teacher fails. Communism, in it's original meaning, doesn't have an elite. Decisions are made through direct democracy without any ruler.

Then there are the twisted versions of it that are really no different than self proclaimed democratic state that just have one party to vote on...

 

[ElderKingpin]

If Communism is direct democracy, why isnt it called direct democracy.

 

[Azlier]

Because direct democracy is a form of government where the people directly vote for their leaders.

In Communism, every action is voted upon directly. There are no leaders.

 

[uberfoop]

Because direct democracy is a form of government where the people directly vote for their leaders.

False. That's representative democracy.

I was taught that Communism was rule by an elite few

While that generally happens in governments attempting to establish a Communist system, and so may be a reasonable view in practical application, the person who taught you that is an idiot. In fact, Marx's description of a Communist system was practically the opposite: it was one that would be classless and stateless, and, heck, private-propertyless.

If Communism is direct democracy, why isnt it called direct democracy.

Because:
1-Direct democracy describes a political structure whereas most theories of Communism describe a political, social, and economic structure.
2-Not all theories of Communism involve all that much direct democracy.
3-It would have been hard for many 20th century 'Communist' states to take themselves seriously if they had been using a self-explanitory term like 'direct democracy' with the kind of meaning that 'direct democracy' has to describe themselves.
4-People like fewer syllables.
5-Your assertion isn't entirely accurate. Communists have thrown the term democracy around enough that pretty much any state with the term 'Democratic' in its name can be assumed to be a Communist state. Like the GDR. Or, for an example of one still in business, the DPRK. Additionally, it's not rare at all for Communist regimes to assert that they represent a democratic proletariet dictatorship.

 

[Azlier]

I was taught that representative democracy is when you vote for people who then vote for the leaders (what America does).

 

[uberfoop]

I was taught that representative democracy is when you vote for people who then vote for the leaders (what America does).

Then you were taught wrong. Representative democracy is any situation in which government officials in charge of making laws are elected by the people. I suppose your 'elect people who elect people' thing would be considered to be representative democracy, but simply electing lawmakers directly is also representative democracy.

Direct democracy is when the lawmaking process is handled democratically in a direct manner, meaning the people decide on the laws directly, hence the name.


It's not like the US is completely devoid of direct democracy, by the way. All that I&R stuff....

 

[KillerChi]

I, for one, believe that Communism is the only type of "government" that can work flawlessly and indefinitely. The requirement of everybody underneath it to be perfect and without blemish is a real bummer in order for everything to work, though... I do not like the idea of Socialism.

(Funny, in School we just had a discussion about various governments and their flaws)
It's a great idea, Communism is, but don't forget, we're talking about humans.
People get greedy. People want more and more and more.
People think they should get paid more than others because they work harder. I personally believe Socialism isn't that bad, but they try saying everyone is equal, but it isn't, because the supervisors who log how hard they worked/how long end up having more power.

I was taught that representative democracy is when you vote for people who then vote for the leaders (what America does).

We're actually what is known as a Constitutional Republic. We are a republic, constitutional because the government's power is limited.

In Communism, every action is voted upon directly. There are no leaders.

What about the chairman? We have a leader because our nations founder's wanted to have a leader so we could act decisively. In a full Democracy, decisions would take a while to make. What if we got invaded? We would have to vote on what to do if we had no leaders whatsoever.

If Communism all actions are voted upon, they'd be a democracy.

Also, Azlier, it really sounds like you're being fed propaganda.

 

[T.s.e]

People get greedy. People want more and more and more.

No, they don't.

When people have access to everything they need, they behave very differently compared to a society where you need to constantly care for yourself instead of others. Greed isn't hardcoded in our genes, it only happens because we need to make sure we come out better off than other people. In a communist society, we all have what we need to survive, maybe even more. There's no reason to continue being greedy when all you need is right in front of you.

Greed was created by capitalism, and will eventually destroy capitalism. One day, people will hopefully see how flawed capitalism essencially is, and make a world where we don't have to leech of each other to survive.

Also, Azlier, it really sounds like you're being fed propaganda.

How so?

 

[KillerChi]

No, they don't.

When people have access to everything they need, they behave very differently compared to a society where you need to constantly care for yourself instead of others. Greed isn't hardcoded in our genes, it only happens because we need to make sure we come out better off than other people. In a communist society, we all have what we need to survive, maybe even more. There's no reason to continue being greedy when all you need is right in front of you.

Greed was created by capitalism, and will eventually destroy capitalism. One day, people will hopefully see how flawed capitalism essencially is, and make a world where we don't have to leech of each other to survive.


How so?

That's the thing about Capitalism, it's centered around greed. But, so are most governments. Capitalism didn't even invent greed, it's been with us for an extremely long time. The earliest forms of Capitalism rose up a few centuries ago(at the most.) Humans are self-centered by nature, it's instinct so we survive. If the average Communist was given this classic moral question "Would you die so a complete stranger would live?" I'm willing to bet, whether they admit, they would choose living over allowing the complete stranger to survive. All governments have their own ups and downs. (Except for Anarchy, there are no "ups".)

 

[T.s.e]

Capitalism didn't even invent greed, it's been with us for an extremely long time. The earliest forms of Capitalism rose up a few centuries ago(at the most.) Humans are self-centered by nature, it's instinct so we survive.

That's only the case because we didn't have the technology to secure a comfortable lifestyle for everyone centuries ago, but we do in the present. We still refrain from using and improving our technology, because corporations seeking to gain more money can't profit over machines that won't malfunction after short time. It is an endless downward spiral, we can't improve our lifestyle as long as it's governed by money and money-manipulators. If we could have a true communist society, there would be no need for the instinct of greed.

 

[Azlier]

True Communism is both true democracy and true anarchy.

 

[T.s.e]

True Communism is both true democracy and true anarchy.

I fail to see how it can be a true anarchy, Communism incorporates a strong state, not no state whatsoever.